ML20214A835
| ML20214A835 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 11/03/1986 |
| From: | Comley S AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | Harbour J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214A784 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-1, NUDOCS 8611200253 | |
| Download: ML20214A835 (1) | |
Text
j 1
l Mansion Drive Ibwley, Mass. 01969 November 3, 1986 l
VIA PEGISTERED FRIL Jerry Harbour, Ph.D.
Administrative Judge p
Atcniic Safety & Licensing Board 5
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Camlission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Judge Harbour:
1 Enclosed please find a copy of the James. V. Dadovano case which relates to the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant. His sole position was to inspect welds at this plant. He was charged with 11 counts of Federal violations from 7-30-82 to 3-15-83 and pleaded guilty and was sentenced 9-30-85.
'Ihis case was never fully investigated and nine counts were dismissed with prejudice.
'Ihere were also other people who should have testified, co-wrkers of Mr. Padovano, but they mre never asked. I thirJc the least the Departrient I
of Justice could have done was to fully investigate the case and let all witnesses be questioned. I feel the case should be re-opened in Washington through the Justice Department.
Please read the enclosed letter I have given 'To The People of New Hampshire'.
I have had more than 30,000 copies printed and nore coming.
As you know, I have e rked hard in trying to provide the public with the real story of the NRC.
I have to be totally comitted, forgetting about myself, to getting this accomplished and I can assure you that I am.
I would like to hear frcm you at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely, U
h v
s Stephen B. Comley SBC/mk P. S.:
I have also enclosed an entire over-view of what I have been doing these last several nonths.
Enc: Information booklet Padovano case
"'Ib the People of New Hampshire" i
86tIz#4253 Or'k())
GV OM 6t a gg, x
10-27-86 TO THE PEOPLE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE I am a resident of Bowley, Massachusetts which lies 2 miles outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius. I am also the administrator of the Sea View Nursing hme in Ibwley. My family has been in the nursing hme profession for over 40 years.
We really W e concerned in the Seabrook issue when we found out that there is not an eable evacuation plan for people who cannot be roved. This includes children hospitalized for surgery who nust be sheltered in place because it would be dangerous to move thm. Tne only means of care is providing a bottle of iodine as well as expecting volunteers to stay behind and care for these people. Our town also found out that we could not be inclMM in the evacuation planning even though our young people attend school within the 10 mile radius because they go to a regional school in Newtury, Mass. Since being confronted with these kinds of UN-American practices, I concluded that it was not only the industry that was encouraging this but the Nuclear Regulatory Ccmnission, which led me to believe that the real stench was ccming frm Washington.
During my weeks in Washington, D. C., this was confirmed.
I uncovered scme very disturbing infonnation regarding the safety and viability of nuclear oower olants in the United States, including our neighbor Seabrook. For instance, James K. Asselstine, l
an NRC Ca missioner, has told me in a formal meeting that he has information which supports his assertion that there will be a serious nuclear accident in the United States within the next 20 years, which he admits can happen today and could result in off-site releases of radiation larger than occurred at Chernobyl, unlcco comething is done now to investigate truthfully and regulate conscientiously the nuclear power industry.
Mr. Asselstine feels that the present Administration in the NRC is more of a protector of the industry than of the people.
I was also informed by another NRC official that the Seabrook Plant was built in the wrong location and should never be started up.
I have also learned of the case of James V. Padovano, whose sole nosition was to inspect welds at the Seabrook plant. He was charged with 11 counts of Federal violations frcm 7-30-82 to 3-15-83 and pleaded guilty and was sentenced 9-30-85.
He was sent to jail for 6 months and then placed on 3 years probation. These charges were for not performing inspection of weld and falsifying the records to show that he did perform the inspections. Seabrook will say that this is old news and they took care of it, but since you, the public, are not aware of it, it cannot be old news.
The Padovano case should have been fully investigated but was plea-bargained and 9 counts were dismissed with prejudice. There are also other people who should have testified, co-workers of Padovano, but they were never asked to testify.
I think the least the Department of Justice could have done was to fully investigate the case and let all witnesses be questioned. I have asked for this case to be re-coened in Washington through the Justice Department. Seabrook officials admit that due to Mr. Padovano's gross neglect and lack of concern for the safety of the people of America, it cost over one million dollars to go back to check over Mr. Padovano's work. More importantly, sme of the inspections that he was reauired to be performing could never be re-inspected as they were already covered in cement. Recently, the' NRC granted 11 pages of inspection relief pertaining to current welds, even though the NRC's own regulations require 100% examination. This was found in Exhibit 5 of the NRC Safety Evaluation Report of July 1986 which was presented at the Seabrook hearings held at the Portsmouth Circle on 9-29-86.
This was because Seabrook had such a good performance record. Given the Padovano case and given what had happened -
at Chernobyl, I think all the welds should be checked 200% let alone not checking sme of the at all. Again, this shows that the NRC istrepresenting'the industry, not the safety of the public. I contacted Governor Sununu's office by' registered i
mail on October 15, 1986 requesting him to make public s m e of the things I had found in Washington as well as making public the James Padovano case. His office informed me that they did not know of the case and that they didn't think there would be enough time to do this before election. Your Mr. Sununu is using the Governor's office to represent the industry and not the people..Either this man is l
blind, misinformed or a crook.- Mr. Sununu does not have the right to decide for the
people of today and, nore inportantly, the people of tnterrow whether Seabrook opens,
)
or not. mis right belongs to all of us, not just him and the nuclear industry.
Until the NRC, the industry, and Mr. Sununu stop suppressing the true information about nuclear powr, it's hard for the people to know the real story. Mr. Sununu needs to be raninded that the people are his enployer, and he is the enployee. We desk he sits behind is the people's and has only been loaned to him.
Eighty per cent of our town has officially asked President Reagan to investigate the NRC to see if they are acting responsibly, to request a noratorium on the 1
start up of any new nuclear plants awaiting licenses and that he renind the NRC that this is America not Russia and that they are accountable to the people.
In addition I have officially asked Congressman John D. Dingell frcm Michigan to set up a hearing to subpeona 18 present and former enployees of the NRC. Scme of the enployees of the NRC want to testify because they are ccrumitted to the safety of the people of America. We should applaud then because they have a conscience. They know Chernobyl will happen here unless we work together to see that all wrong-doings within the industry and their own office is exposed.
I appeal to present and former enployees of the Seabrook Nuclear Plant. It is your responsibility to make known any wrong-doings at Seabrook, whether they be regarding equipment, design, or personnel. You have a responsibility to your children, future generations and to your fellow Americans to speak uo now. We will not have the luxury of hindsight when an accident occurs at Beabrook. Please don't wish you had done nore. Do you want the safety - in fact the lives - of millions of people on your conscience? Act. now. Anyone knowing of any nere problens in the plant's construction which may make it unsafe is advised to contact the anployees Legal Project in Amesbury at 388-9620 or feel free to contact me at 948-2002. Your identity will be protected and your information will be used effectively. Also, any time anyone would like documentation on any of this information I have referred to, please feel free to write to me at Box 277, Rowley, Mass. 01969. Because of the overwhelming response of media coverage in Ibwley, because of the contacts I have made in Washington and New York, and because of the ccTmittment of certain NRC officials to expose their own agency, I have had people frcm across the country call me to offer their knowledge of violations within plants that pose a threat to the American people.
Please help to remind scme of our govema.nt officials and the nuclear industry that we run this country, they don't.
Because We Care About Rowley and You, Inc.
MV y
S en B. Cculey, Directo YOW OV G0 y top SEnera) ),
i
~\\
\\
) BECAUSEWE CARE ABOUT ROWLEY AND YOU Stephen B. Comley, Director 280 Main Street Itte. I A. Ikwley. MA 01969 (617)948 2002 O
..}l
~--
,g,,,,, 3,,,;c, y,,
W
- T i i Gygj'gg [ ${gggg',Q{3t),{Ct h ul't.fdtr.
NEW N4_ _.) SHIRE y.PADOVANO
_3 g
,]ygoa'ttt No. 2 t 8 5 0Bc,.,. -..11- 01.-L !
W' ' ' '
i JAMM VMmia PADOVANC w.a...g. a......
I
.k I,
c5 9 'd $
f tre the presence of the ittorney for the government
.""' e nc-om 1aAa the defendant appeared in person on this date September j0, 1985 CDIDISEL i
i WITHouT COUNSEL.
However the court advised defendast of right to counsel and asked whethef defendedt des 4#ed te hat counsel sooointed by the court ehd the defendant therewoon waived &&sistaded of deudtel.
LX J WITH CcUN5EL I ThcQRS 15 Ehy. Es e *.
m,,,,,
J (Name et Coones4 w
LL ! GUILTY, and the court being satisfied that t
I I Not GUILTY.
' NCLc CofgTJ.*,tgERE.
thereis a ractualbasis tortheples. entered as to Counts I and II ca August 17, 1985 (f
f NOT GUILTY.Defendantis discharged There being a finding / verdict of d ii e GUILTY.
Defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense (s) of Making False Reports in a Matter
""8 '
Under' the Jurisdiction of an Agency of the tidited States in viciation
.3!DGMENT of Title 18: U.S. Code: Baction 1001 (two counts).
J NUY.sM=hether defendant had anything to say whv gudirnent should not be pronounced. gecause n6 suffletent cause to the contrar t
was shown, or acoeared to the court. the court adiudsed the defestdint svitty &e charged and coriojcied and ordered thas: The defendant i hereov committed to the custody of the Attomev deneral or hit authertaed testesedtathe for tr8cnsonment f6e a pert 44 et six modthe SENTS CI Count II:
y The defendant is ccmmitted to the custody of the Attorney General or as nosATicM his authorized representative for imprisonment for a term of six month.
The execution of the institutional portitTr of the sentence is suspendes on:En and the defendant is placed on probatic*i The sentence for Count II is ordered td 'c for,p ceriod of three years.1% cMsecutive tence for Count I.
sncAL The execution of the sentence for Count I is stayed until October 21, cN7Ns 1985 when the defendant is ordered to self surrender to an institution nasAT::N to be designated by the Bureau of Prisons.
l 4CO*""CW L - :n acemer' :c tne icecias conciuene of : enatic: ;rncosee aceve t.s seatee :rt e.-
.s: - e seeera. :ocit;cr: :: see:st:u,e: ::. -.-
%'tCmC'15
'~ers. 5 de or tai * 'uurtect as..m:sec. he aurt n'a,.:nante : e :: ct::.- n tr. cao.:n recuce : e. :ese ::.e secc.r :.en.: : ar CF at an, :ime autms the ortcanon amco at wit.wh 2 namenure etteauso teca.:t 'he seers servaittee by eiw. miv saws s
.ar int ar 3 CgATCH re, cme orottaties for a vioistion occurrms uuring the arcoanon per.oc.
R m.
The court orcers commitment to the sustodV cf the Attisraev derhesi and f ecomrnend.T it is crearea tnat tree Cern seiner COMMITMENT e
a centfied toov o this justment RECOMMEN.
And estrtraltreent to the U.$. Mar-gAf;gy shal or_etMe# duelified offtier sicmo s, Chief f[
~
i i X 1 u s. cames io..
A -;
. "b
{
t t u.s. u..,.re i
Hon. Shane Dev'ne
,.., y r,
,ce
s 4 (,.
,, ~ '
-9,a
.g;:.v.vpyy.49pfirp.p$..;g,y.08, vv r._.. q;,q..p.A,.,pEq.s
- pp
...,; g.
.y.
...g..
r..;:. s :n * :.o. u.,.a. t.ta,a., v.,w. _ :..
. <:, g..t y.
~
17 m.'... y <... :.
. r..y
+
w..
....,.....,'f.w. :-+ :A;. lx, :0lCT.,:n7.,:attgw-ing..,-n.u ;
o - --
.. : w :.
.v..
...d.. M...jhp;3...i'y.l0lSJR:c. CF N.
/.$8 IN THE UNITED STATES. DISTRICT CDURT 4 ' "<.F.it.qc "a Mi-;p$p'N.v,Vf i.
^
us
+-A t
N.r.4-9*
.l.?.i i {
'2 -
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW;EAMPSEIR.W.M +rJg'.& -o 1 g '-~
. s.S
+t.c;r. : ~a, h.
1H. o N.
1 a'
e
.uw,2e r.r.
....;t.f.2:.:; a' m.h; e pw,.4 n yt, w&..<..
9 b-n"
......e, : 4 0. ss v ". :'
a e u u...a..
- m. a..:..
. p g ge g.3 M g M.n.*,l;
- e....
. #a 9 s.
. thited States. of America a.
a
.g.:
.. w m.u n.., ;... :. 4.. w m.
7 g- - ~:-
. n;.w..
~
Um.......
... c c.,.. r. No.,:8 5.. m.. 01 -L..w'..cm"., u*s e.m..'sa"
.... C 16 y,.
u<
.m
. v...
.u
?
,. ?. :a
-4 w,.
- t. _
_.,,., _.m.
4
,4 James V. Padovano
' '. '.- f i V* S' ' ' +
d-
- d.. 1..#
1.
. V-r..
.4 r.
. o : G. r:'. a.......,.t,...
,.... w %.c:3*s, r.&
.. S, y ". " ". c.,, w.. u...
DISMISSAL
- 9 ",,,O' "
N.S.'.,."C R
....a....
n.
- a.
. si Pursuant.to Rul'a 48(a) of the Federalc Rules 'of. Criminal' - W ~ P Procedure and by leave of Court endorsed-hereon, ~ Richard V.
^
Wiebusch., United States Attorney for the ' District of New..~.
-.5:
2-n.~
Eampshire, dlsmisses with prej udice Counts -3,C4, '!,G6,;. 7,'-8,' ;9~,MN:li 5
10, and 11 of the Indictment returned ~ote. June 4, -1985,' in the A 2 -
x g
above-captioned matter.
j{ g-Q, '
g.?-
m.
UNITED ST'ATES..0F ' AMERICA'
.c RICHARD V. WIEBUSCH
,. Uni.t.ed. S.t. ate.. s.s~ A.t..t..orney.'u.'..."
J.
J. '
' ' 0.,.
, t.
u 1
- s.. W.e se
- a:.s..,.mctn.a3 cdv ts it.ua :.. v i v.s.;). v.y...s.
s." d.
- aC ". :.::
...hr.
f
- 0.. ::.L t. "J C..J.T..
_2 o
- d. Richard F...Jo..hnston r..:...
%.5 1...
- i. :. *
- 5..
~.
. :aAssistant'. U.nh.. Attorney M i;.
Ln
.... ~.
. w : d. -A t a n ~ M.u-
, =
c.
.1 Leave of Court is hereby granted for the filing of the foregoing Dismissal.
.o.
..s.-
.:: x %..,
. s..
('~t O
. Chief U.S. District Court Jucge M. NN I, d 6 Date:
T..
. g..
...u.
u.-
- . s. v
- .
/
.,. a... m...;.... :
u..
cc:
homas P. Ehr, Escuire.
d the -
.:e n.' *...x.
i
. u. e n ^-..<
~
SM i
.bJ
.:s :r m
=
USP l...u..= w '..'..'.. s*e*n c.'- -
.o.,; ; c,.
.~a-
'd :';\\.
~
p-
- s..
. ~
c, ;..
3.,,>n;-
..e
.,. s, l
..e,
'I.
i
- x..x? -
. x
/
~
2
~ ;. :
- .... w.a & M i a s sate!L 9 5 b S N 5 k d W i ? 5 9 W 'l 4 D S = M +.. %, f ?. "'. N.?
Y. W. :,
.~......
?.
J UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW EAMPSHIRE
,. Y,1 -
.. c.:
t.
.. g '.
RECORD OF COURTROOM MDwn.S u.'
.e - :..", p
.f.
- f. r,
u-y 1/19 /9[ '. 8 $
w:
m p t.
DATs:
Mejc_ Ges u d IN CCCRC (I
m.u IN CHMBERS ( )
Q
,e, CCUEMCCM CEPUIY:
l'
- . e.awm mm.w_,.um:.m.w.mm--n. w.,,;:a
-.w.
.r..
- o " t
- 0;
~
.)S..
LLhItPck'Ard-Ea 5
.j Case m.'GC.SS-I b-f -L '
y, a.
NO.m t.c WOtt&
nAc.co.n$..,'
.. ~..
c.
l l
- : s m.r.-- v :. m w = w w. x s u
- t.,,..
,.-., n : w.,.
If'CR, Deft.preserte:
E h PRESE E:
( % ) Yes
(
) No Fcr Plff(s):
l C_k b h e AkOYN 2"
~5 1
Fcr De.k. (s):
MyVN G A D/3 tr'- i '* u-E 23 I i
i
. w -. :,.:: +. n...a.-
- : u +-a...mw.-
- .: 1.M l
1p TYPE ce PmnG:
n.
...u....
..,, - ' ' =.,
1i N
P
( ) CCURE TRIAL, DAY 4
) U2i
(
) to
( ) HEARD G CN
( v[OmER 0OC
[
4.
I6
,. 5I
$ Y"WA
- A$
.S Y
"$D*
A" YrY***YW
- '.h r
~
PFO '" >T.5GSKA :u:.T EERY:
n:
.i..
C or a + '.s o a',,- i< e e.-F Mc Pndn,em w a
bPy2& +c.d7o net O r*s./ e1{st8 0 I4 llnT. 6f $ Nt
'nDte e 191E'rL Y AXi kJ l
l t%d:s imi r ) n d e > N (7A
%1 0>e n/dn+$ "
e q
./ /CNb V
~
U
)
Ustem-u n.-m cCmmmza Cu REmsE i
y
~,. -..
.r.......
- i h~l
.,...w. m,......
..j.
.e
/
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW' HAMPSHIRE E '
..?
RECORD OF COURTROCM MINUTES I
.~ f r
4 m!2CRE:
50 DATE:
9 -Sc -d'T REroicER:
5L IN CDURU (T
IN CEMBERS ( )
c:URL'ICCM CEPUTY:
A
' \\g i>\\nn E
US 1
)
y, 3
case No. Cg 35-ff,.t. L
)
1
& <!_ m_n -
)
]
}
. x c e.
E a~: a p - - w : w x ~ m m, r-a.<,.w=.
If CR, Deft pz:esene:
C 1 m v. w rr:
( g) y,,
( ) 33 Fcr Plff(s):
O Wr_,u H-i.
v For Deft (s):
T Flu l
. y +., s..,w-w
~4 mn w
...:=~m -+x- =,.cc :.. c.
.m.:
TYPE CF e.= i -' u.JG:
- s,.
(
) JURE TRDL, DAY
. svub=u INT!CDCCID7 l
(
) C:URE TRIAL, DAY
-(
) US
(
) No h
!I
(
) HEARING CN il (7) OIEER C0c N.e'6_,.
t
- Lu. W.w-!w
- w: e.c -:w:t,.mWW4,=r =w%=-mn.%3m%
PFO --MINGS/u.A w ENTRY:
Morte,re-C4 1 d.w a., &.,*.-.
/* t. 3 la r=_r 21P[S c'4
.~t u. u ~.
c cu s. ert ?.w-db
- M).) g* pp ft 4
.T
- 1.b
(,,,
L t.
I, 4
f(t.
ft,
- @ !! $g el 0
u
- $J f Ml,,.(*
a
,1
)
. ;.;:-:,.f ' S< M L n b-a ; W %.. 6 "
-.. + :.. y '
-?
]
3 JueHdd %I3%sivic+.q. 'W. V..; r~... i,... l f
.*- 4 r,
a
.... v.:
... 3 c:;...-
.w....
- .
- ... :r,..
~
. Kj.',ip.;.; fpt. ' "., fp/,q,' p
.fl@'d...:. ' jl w: [ ~.'.3y..
[
INTaEUNITEDSTATESDIkTRICTCOURTj[!$EN,N
.,:,L.
@!!.4.]4. M G." pe@:J%3 D M N )127-2
[.
roa Tan oISrazcz pr MEW aamasazaE..qqp ' gs.p p
.a n
,. v.., o,.
u.,
+
- crc, [s 3n
.w.. r.],.
- g..
r-
- cr y ?
, n.....,, - : ' 'i. "c. ' y i:
- ..t.w '
- .
~,
c r?
~.
+
Unit.ed States of America v..
85-16-01-L m
~,
,. ' ' ',.J..,
.e
},
~'
James v. Padovano, N..~
i:
y
~
.s
.q PLEA AGREEMENT <~
vse J '-' '
i Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
[
1 Procedura, the United States of America, by Richard V. Wiebusch,.
>ll t1 United States Attorney for the District of New Hampeld.re, and'the
~
defendant, James v. Padovano, and his attorney, Thomas Ehr, Esq.,
~
have agreed upon the following:
..y..
~
1.
Defendant acknowledges-that he has'been charged in the indictment in this case with violations'of Title 18, United o
States Code, Section 1001.
~
i 1.
Defendant has read the-charges against his contained in the indictment, and those charges have been Yu,lly explained to
.a
..d wem 4 er him by his attorney.
)
3.
Defendant fully understands th.e nature and. elements of the crimes with'which he has been cha::ged.
4 4.
Defendant will enter a voluntary plea of guilty to Counts 1 and 1 of the indictment in this chse.
.5.
Defendant agrees that this Plea Agreement shall be filed
{
j
.... r 1
and become a part of the record in this case.
i v
~
- ,y.
l t,
, m; '
f,
. ) ',i; s ;
N; j....
I
..y r ;, -
J
... f.
u
, :q
,f
'+
g...
4
!l
.J*.
- e
. # *T t T %** ;,
- g.
e
. pyy..,.
q
/
i" ' /r -
. x x ' " +l.NY '. : ^3 lh i
~
'1 Defendantwill' plead" guilty-becausehe-'is:.infactsguilty7,,'f-Jn
- c. : ' 2..@ M.E - {.
f.i 6.
- o.:
9y '
I
. i of the charges contained :in ' Counts 1 and 2 of the indictment 2In, ? V.
.h e
1 d'"
pi'sadind guilty to these ' counts,'idefhad' ant acknowl' edges thasi (1) As ch'ar' ed'in # ount 1 of 'th'e" indictment, he did'... _
- (;
g C
J.
~ '
j.
willfully and knowingly submis'a falsified 1iquid penetrant
.g..
examination report' to the Pn11mme 'Higgins; Company, on or abou[
9 raif e March 15, 1983 in tihat said report falselyishted' that the
-l defendant had performed a liciuid genetirant"eramination on Field..
Wald 4600-1406 wisen in fact'he~had not.jerformed such
'-(
1
-.[
- <"W h L.
.e examinatio'n.
. e.
2 g
(2) As charged' in~ Count"l' of the?indictmenti he did willfully and knowingly suba'it a falsified ' liquid henetrant examination report to the Pullman'Higg' ins Company, on or about March 2,1983 in that said r'eportialdeifstinted-thatthe -'
defendant had performed a liquEd'penetranV,5tz' amination ~of Field I
1 l
Weld'4600-1407 when' in fact he had not perfqEmed such examination. -
~~
~
I~'
".,f, nan l' 4 er
~
7.
Defendant" understands the counts"to which he-will plead I
guilty carrp' the following 'penaltfies:i' m ' - " -
I
(
(1) Count 1 carrie's"a maximum 'p'enalty of 5 year (s)
~
imprisonment and a m'a'zimum' fine of $1'0,000Jan' set >out in Title 18, U.S.C. 51001. " '"-
~ "' E "" " * "i "
~( 2) Count'S #carri'es a maxihum penalty of.5 year (s) imprisonment and a' maximum' fine of $10','000laa+ set out ein Title 18, U M c. _S.10 01 f ~ ~* ' ' '"
"#' ' "' 2 " " $9'
.s ; :.a.a..:. u
,;.s.; 5myaa6ea m: a duuc x..;..;..
-l 3.
b
,.6-ha...S'?
- j h
- N.
~ < -
- ~ -
E te y,...
. c. W ;-
- MM
'?;} 'i;{ W;. '$M:QW M:y
- 7. 7. p?l:%g?;;,
^
/
[
, l.:-y :5.
' ? U kk.1 " ' !
3
...J 4.]. -;[, e o
fen'tence' carried.dadorI hd [,}a.;fcp.
' 3 l. d..
....c '4 f,.,.;.Q:. $;; j, [
Therefore, the total potential t
c6unts to which defendant will ple N guilty is 1.0 years
!j
- i.,
Y
.s imprisonment and a $20,000 fine.
j, i.
FT.#
~ ~
x MoIceover, under 18 U.S.C. 53623, the court in this case may
,.+ :
impose an alternative fine, in addition.to any period of i t,.-
j
?
imprisonment, in an amount not to exceed $250,000.
Defendantunderstandsthatbypleading,gu[1tyhe
, n 8.
currenders certain rights, including the following:
(1) If defendant persisted, in a plea of not guiltiy to tha charges against him, he would have the right to a public and 1
i cpnedy trial. 'The trial could be either a jury trial or a' trial by the judge sitting without a jury.
The' defendant had a right to c. jury trial.
However, in order that the trial be conducted,
by. the judge sitting without a jury, the defendant, the govern-ment and the judge all must. agree that the trial be conducted by tho judge. without a jury.
(i) If the trial is a jury trial, thgry w,ould be composed of twelve laypersons selected at random.
Defendant and hin attorney would have a say in who the jurors would be by removing prospective jurors for cause where actual bias or other dioqualification is shown, or without cause by exercising so-call'd peremptory challenges.
The jury would have to agree e
1 unanimously before it could return a' verdict of.either guilty or not guilty.
The jury would be instructed'that' defendant is i
prs =umed innocent, and that it could not convict him unless, aftor hearing 'all the evidence, it was persuaded of defendant's j
l' '
7 i
I e
f
-.-n,,n..
, ;:s.g.
- .--
- :. ~ -4 %. - :. :. x '
- _
4.y.
n.'"
.Q li Tyt,P.fg.;t pr..
4.- o, 7,
p.
- i1 g...
.,...... t.. 9
_._'l
. %'j.,..
l 5
.. f.,i m.~ v 1r..:f / *.: g $,l'1. 4 ! }
4.g... c '.4 a.'4 ha::e..r 9. i C.
u..<,
n
.y,.
- fc; f.i; n;..
- '3 guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and.that it was.to conside
...a 3.x
- .e.;^ g.
j
....... u. c.r R e in n.
.- ? - JJA ' -
count of the indictment separates.;.a X'
~.'l,.., g y.
a.
- 1 6....
w..
- . < W.:. '
^i, w.-
(3) If the trial is held by the judge without a jury, "i ' 7 -
tl a
%aw.
u the judge would find the facts and determine, after hearing all
- 1. c.
W
,o n.
...........c.
n :2. e.e ua t uu,t.. v ;g r.... n.; f :, m j
the evidence, and considering each count. separately,~ whether or i
.n s :..
~ ~..
1 1
'R'"
not he was persuaded of defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable 4.. t,,,g a.
.a
.. s doubt.
..c s.; 2 a ~.
..a a
y (4) At a trial, whether by a jury or a judge, the j; s.,, -
[
l d
. -:. 3 3,
&m a._
m government would -be required to present its witnesses.and other.
..Ly.
.s.
v.
evidence against defendant.
Defendant would be able to confront
...i
.. - u..
m.i.
c.
s
.. r..
those government witnesses and his attorney.would be able to l
S.....
....,s...
cross-examine them.
In turn, defendant could prese'nt witnesses
.. i.
e t
w,w...
a.
and other evidence in his own behalf.
If the witnesses for defendant would not appear" voluntarily,' he 'could requ$re their
.q...,...-.
.v.
attendance through the subpoena power of the court.
..n. 4
.. v:..
.s (5) At a trial, defendant would have a privilege t
... t.
s_
against self-incrimination so that he could : decline to testify,
... c.... 2 :'f. w"".
- ar and no inference of guilt could be drawn from his refusal to testify.
If defendant desired to do so, he could testify in
.m.
,y s,.
his own behalf.
a
.r.
w.
(6) If defendant went to trial and was convicted,
- ..,....a :a 4, ~. a....
.. i u
.u.
he would have the right to appeal his conviction to the United -
...l.
.. } k....
States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, and ultimately to
.u :.. c.,
.q
..,a.;. 9
.g.;
A :i
.a i petition for certiorari to the Supr.eme Court of the United 1.
.s.
States.
g 7
e
,.,Q% -of,, :l g ?.;
.l Nj
[. ~
.~
.n
... ~.
.,p4p@j.;g-b 4;- r y.y.y;,;,yp;j p,g, y,4, #
%.q..
,- y,,
., > v;-
5 F-
..t-
.c'
- GG.y
' i.
f 4,..
' i...'.
Defendant understands that;b(=p1'eading guilty he is 9.
' u.' y. :. e;. - '
waiving all the rights set forth; in the, prior paragraph. ?,..c..,f) ';,7,..
~
.L y
t-Defendant's attorney has ~ explained tho$e rights to him, and the'~ ?
[
', ~
o j
-;^.~
L consinquences of his waiver of those rights.
- (
10.
Defendant understands that the United States Attorney's.]
L
[
~~
j Office will fully apprise the District Court and the United
~
States' Probation Office of the nature, scope,g extent of v
defendant's conduct regarding the charges against him, and related matters, including all matters.in' aggravation and mitiga-tion relevant to the issue of sentencing.
~
11.
D,efendant understands that the United States Attorney reserves the right to notify any state or federal, agency by whom defendant is licensed, or with whom defendant does business, of defendant's conviction.
12.
At the time of sentencing,'the government thall:
A.
Recommend Char defendant be'hentenced to incarceration in a penal institution for a tems of incarceration n,
of 2 years and recommend that the defendaqi M P difed on W
probation for a period of 5 years, B.
Recommend that, in the event the court -imposes a period of probation as a part of the sentence, the court order as a condition of probation that defendant'make wastitut, ion of
$130,684 to Pullman Higgins C9mpany, 13.
Defendant and his attorney. acknowledge that no threats,
~
promises, or representations have'been ma44, nor agreemehts j
~,. ~
j,>
. :,:; e
~
y
~
a....
.7;-
=
~
k 2.vM99. 3l9; trim; Py :.r.QTaf4T!?.it fz n.,0.<.9
'WNet3;:, '
f.
y
- ?.:.3:,
,},,.g...y:'
'.-- z.;_s ;
- '.g
- fl.jf,yy~<.'
...., 7,. g s.. :.,.
f
- b..x..$h %n; E Nki t.
w
'h,. h'NN Y h
... g. _s
. :.5 -@Nh {,, ;. g &"b yht3M.N9.?G :
reached, other than'those set forth~1a~this defendant to plead,$silth9
- v4..
..q.jagreement,x,,a-induce :"6.'9 ?.+-
fo t
)
... ; d ;;i d a r ' ;
.'ight557.hn, '.; [M ?.59.""5Y.7 I
.". ~ 1..
w
-14. ~ Defendant ~and his attoieney ; acknowledge.that thisaticornay" aci DeMuh e
4..
v.
Agreement does not limit the Government from objecting to or ~.2..,'..;g..m e l otherwise fully responding to subsequent' motions for reduction of t
[
- "4-3 sentence, motions to set aside conviction and/,o4, sentence 'or
- e...
similar motions which may be filed on~ defendant's behalf.
15.
After sentence has been imposed on the counts to which ".,.
~
4 defendant pleads ' uilty as agreed herein,l the government willf g
move to dis'miss the ranud ning counts. of, the indictment.
16.
It is understood by the part.ie's.that the sentencing Judge is neither a party to nor bound by this agreement and,is free to impose the maximum penalties as' set'forth in. paragraph l
i seven above.
Furthermore, the defendan't's;dissatisfadtion or -
displeasure with whatever sentence the judge in fact imposes will not afford the defendant any basis for withdrawing his guilty
- s e plea.
..# umm 9 er 17.
Should the judge refuse to accept 'the defendant's plea in this matter, this agreement will become null and void and neither party shall be bound thereto.
e AGREED:
I a' 4 Y. xi s
.,s RttCHARD V. WIEBUSCH ames V. Padovano United States Attorney Defendant e
m.
e
'p
- O I
f
a..
v
.;.7.
c.. p ;.. -' ;
m m,n 7:q ;:p. ; tp:9.(_p
,. ;. v;;;;.y.,,;_.,,,, _
, c...n.
..e,.,.,.
f..
.P..
i
,c,..
s
.s.,... ;.: 4 fg,;. < i ~.Qe.Fda,W;.:j. l:. ;
p /%.,,:.C.
-. y.::':.'p.!ji s ;iJ 1,.
,4, >2 %..%&f.f.1,Ml.M..>M.Si.
I.
n..
g.:-
.u.
~;.....
y __.__ h 7. M " 'dN '.
5
[' f - [ (. N ;[$..h:)d N,, ;
Richard P. JonSton
~
1hossaa P.~ Busi Baq.
.., ? i l.!-f *
,.., 8 j Attorney for De$endant f. ~.f. !',,Cy?'i
- g Assistant 0 5. Attorney.
p
, -.. O..*b
.ga
?.
I e
t t
9 I
e
+
0 go N
e e
t
^
s
.*I a*
G 0
ee 4
9 9
. 9 e
f=
e.
ummer nv
.if Wuns ad er 9
i l
4 e
g Ge FM 90
' g t-8 i
=
6 r
^
__. w; y, ~ ; "
r..... n. - :. _ '., ; * -.
.y..:.,..
..,., ;.S,.. _ ;
, ~.
0,1g,t Sv.3,...,.
,,. g nrqs' y s
. - ~.
.e-g 9'.,
- ., P a
'U.$.U%"'::~4~ 5 M :,
h
/
- ~
r mgy(a.? 1? y,y;.'.
,y
+
.l
' rdt,.
4 i e
.t 9 ;
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICWjOF NEW HAMPSHIRE
,,, g g.. g g g Ig,
j
{
's United States of America Criminal No. 85-16-01-L v.
James V. Padavano-
,r i.
0 MOTION TO AMEND 3
~
NOW COMES Bruce E. Kanna,. United States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire, on behalf of the United States of America, and moves to correct the defendant's name in the
[
Indict:nent filed on June 4, 1985 as follows:
1.
The Indictment states defendant's name as " JAMES V.
PADAVANO;*
2.
The defendant's true identity has been dete'rmined to be
" JAMES V. PADOVANO* through conversation with the defendant and g
his attorney.
- r. e 3.
No memorandum in support of this Mon 5 necessary.
{
a 4.
Due,to the nature of this Motion, concurrence of opposing counsel was not sought.
I Respectfully submitted, 1
Richard V. Wiebusch
/
United States Attorney I
D.~ rte t
- E -
') ;,TC
,)
d,_
'BY E
htion grnDM R.ula[P-Richard F. Johnston b objee: ion by op;:c E een::se).,
Assistant U.S. Attornity'
^[$l
,Q
..m cam
{(;sg).
OS M, Ob f >
i To Counsel
,. %,.. ;} ;; ;:...w:
~. -
+
(
e,o e.e. w.,s.r
%.,,,.,...g
...w l]
s' jaa naam SUMMQNS IN A CRIMINAL CA85 r
~
~E I
"yh ywgs 3!!istrict deus ~ '#fsseSaIn 7 ii h;E_F W yNITED STATES OF AMEiliGA
., f CR,85,16-:01-L bu 14 A e 8MflK r
,4 gg.g, t
~~
o Tgonesang socassssep~sesa~ gang --
~"-
~ - -
~
Jameg Vinggn't Padaygng 9
J.AME_S. VINC.E..M. T_ PA. DAVK.N..Q-
- i 535 Lgnghgag?
g Waukeshir Wt 53166 SS:. g p sfB s
g y-m e --. - --
e, si;ip ci l
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMQNED tg aggear before mg Q W.S. Difyi G59(1 gr M.S.
sgM at h l
)
'?
55 E 9?
time, date and place set forth twlow.
7F '",'
~ ~ - ' -
(ggm ng.
g rucz UNITED STATES DISTRIQT QQUR'?
IN 55 Pleasant St.
Fourth Ploor
- - -. - - -. - - = =
j concord, N.E.
033Q1 g_
uns 4,
65 300 PM
..- --. A 2"*3
?
,. -j -- - -. - - -
To answer a criminal lCXndictment.
O Infgrypqtion QQgingleint G Vightion Ngtisis
~
18
. $sCficN ~ 1001 '_ _ _.,
enAcc.no you wiTn a viourion cF UNITED STATES CoQE TIT 1.1..
gaspiprion er oppsuss
,.7 c,
False Statements s
tr.,
9_
r
- r, '
.sf wns ' i ar-Please cgntagt U.S. Prghatign QCgigg Eggliedigtgly ggr a Pretrial Serviges Interview.
(@Q3) 325=6041
~
l i
e
' uFdA47dOGCf.tWJa ct zan ar couhvF ' ~ ~ ~ ~
~
ggs
--898@t' E't 1@@E
" ' ' ' ~ '
o // _
B uts oseup._aw i
nyne
.,,n.s % w w,,e+ e,,,. y, w.
. J'
..e..
t
.V?W h ?',O pq*
.,g...'=.
e G..s;.,
p..,.,, -
.. e., u...w,
.,Y ' 'e -
t v...-.
- -s,..
6E:..a.*db :G nd'tifWil'j.'at M CE.
...s...,
i t >...., g :. ' -2 * * ' ;.-
".'u'! ',c..
~
.,.. m.L.-
> r
( P;T;;tC:".
L...
ncrf.D...c.. -t,.:: n. :-....
.2.
.'L..
'....u.
. r.... e.
w e.<.c
..1 (,.
...-,.. m..r.
1
.,u.. k...,...u,
, s..,.. -.,
^
g,
..a. = 2 a
>a :
a.-
u-
.umin a::.:ssu :p
)
...s....-y.....,
\\
~
,..as.-..2..~..
June 19, 1985 a c n ;i.
i..:... :....
hi. :
.5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.':8 e-
<ian.s asha, iis i :ioe
.c.
i t
?.:
U I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion b'as ".
~ ~ ~
been mailed this date, postage prepaid,~ to' Thomas P. Ehr,7"j ~.' T~ ~M$
n Esquire, Ehr & Si:ern, 933 N. Maysfair Road, Suite 104, Militauke.r c.-
- l,.5,. 56 l
WI 53226, counsel for defendant.
..._,2
- .ne..
c.
t
>rw
..a...
.g
=
M w
i f
I Ric.. hard F. J.ohnston
.j iAssistant U.S.
torney
- l z: an:
l[
?
- gs
.....a
.,t
.. i, J-
-a t,
...e
.n
.[i i!!
]'w y.
- s e i,-
ir
.if wuns a er I.
g
.t l
.r
...a.
. :. u. _.... -ut; c.
c 1
.4..-
- v...:... :.. 2 i.
(
8 e
i t.
'--1
... s artu :.: 1 J c2 :
I.
'4.
8
- u. -
%a.
J j
L
....,.g i
g*
{f t
i o.
. m.y.
.:~
p.
. $ $ $ M M C M._...@MS$$$i!R
,e & lQ % W k&q5
..n.;:t:6vufhd.ps
,x h
.;. %. 3. #g @p. M.g g# M. gg%
c v
y j
,.~ygp
.g y-
"UNITEDSTATES.MydytCTkOURT.4g.yggggghg,}TH M l;
- Y M.i
- q;}gl.0F:NEl(iEAMPSHI
- DIST R
g >y
. - A %O
~
i " DISTRICT a
gt. ' }
Q,Qfy y & 3 Q Q 4 g 8Gj{ f. 5;
~
.UnitedStatesofAmerica.lJ[.,y
]~ ym., 3 g.,;h;q.yny'
..n.. + w.
g.p:.
.{
g
~A,.
s M.pw y
- 3 Case 5No O g'.,Cr "
n.m..p w
. w. m~.w James Vincent Padovano.,bggy f' g*. ; M6&&
.,el.g.p?W:hf v.
M 4
3
.IT 7
W:re
'M.nW f["
D e f e n d a n t..,.'. n. w.- j pl Q>,% w. N.E -
W.T. :.
.g eyk3
- a
- x.~
,, ~
yyQQ
-,Q.f", -
'G n
'3 urvenm nw e m- -- ---_
n_.-
.~ ne n..c. - =. m__IesP.WPE A.m 4.w+
yt -
r REPORT OF ARRAIGNMENT eBL.0 PS.mMAGISTRATE SN.- aI gM[. M" g i
s -eum A
e.-
4
. [ h k.y g
.N6 ~
M$7
{*
a,( ( $y4pg -
MgA%
14.2 igg 5 'sU M E
L Dater mm
' ~,%,FM/4h adNT@.: p$'((fQff$g g
'biL e
+~9 mp.:,, ~,
Arrest /Other Dat@&.@+< 4WM.
r,h p.;iggg ff cnyhb'&PiS&e, /
a '.ikr.:.n.:mv;'.wi@y%y$; ' '.Mf58M.A=.i ue
..N. v:~9hy M%
c/dy$. F Government: em : - ARichardt FWJohnsteng AUSK.. t MNkM.9hg'PM
=:: W s m - 4c. e..:x.c ' o%r m. mi?' W ti % M % q v 5 O n %
nu f
Appearances:
M W.Dn k.5 s ~m, e:W N
k
.,i,
De.fendant:
o aP v.-4:pn;;,;+M. g%g(g.g3 ~ "^(;$/g gggy.p) y
.m..-
hS~fs,
...zm w@m,grety.$(q.g):m.,W:h Bail.,.
t ims s.w
. m.;
ersona k Recognizance W..n.+@ %gd M'MM
,..m...t.. n.4.. w ;. < v, c y -
4.
y:n. n.e m
.W. f W?958.%.c.,qr. 2) ' F.
n, Cdr
,".;See ~ Conditions-of f Re eas' yL.E/:b a jm.=.,:s(
' M W,.;.hy A s
g.c ed:.Mdopp?
- 3,.
L~ e r... M,- y N. i@.c.#4 YeKAM
- y ew s.....
Conditions:
- L s..s9. r. u ::: Q :. g.g g g g f g % @..4 er-py*.,...;a.,1ag :g,. ;,,o M *+.
e - % mm.aap n.
~
s h
O W.: M.'hk.h.Q"6 x0Y:..'1*f
- r:"h:'kY: f hff.$
! W h M.n
-N. -
Not guilty'"'e@a'Q':m2 n44'.%,u.w:
Plea:
(x)
. ~.% :-r,. MEW. F',w,~. z.. M:.0 M. '.....W~
a
-e m
'. l M
.. l'
.E.
L' 1'
~,e#. M'.
' '. W 1T.,
l Change.of
()
.w Waiver of presentencel v:..v m Consent to trialgby. US.4/4 W.m rate MUy ~ '~ :'i.. ~~
E.N 1.
r-invesdgLeid:
()
- -q.d
% M.{
()
... %. $...,.te V lh'4,p,.',.,
9..
?
... r~..
y.v.r.':n M.v %... :g;u.;,pyg.. g.cg
' 'Q f
3
..v
,. 3-m.y.
2.3..
.p Appointment of counsel:.$v..p)hYes J.i&p(r5y%iNoy.Wy'S J. E T
..e
n
(:',
@ d W y @ g c d'7 '2f M f,'. P R /c
[.
~
"4Q:uzg.,lL(.5.)!('^f4
. n. w'^ G'.x, Previous.1W~ appointed @-;+eM:.s:.M
' ?n*
d zw*.%.gh 2:,flp% qy' r-,,, y =; ;;y.'%{*,:a v....., h yi w:
n.
<n;;e
'^- *
-. g c.g-.a x.:
g*<.,.D A.."? r 9 w " ' a.
^
i Name:
NmE P.
Phr. 'E scr '.2 'y,G. ".'f p
=:
.u W3%%%WWW: :
-W ~~-.r -
'-f*
c m ei-n. ' suite >104 /*933+Nb Mavsfair7Rd.P * ' /.
R.,;
Address: whr
.Q, 9
M M N 2b M1 W F;Y-JNq !A ^ F' Z gyli.
.s
'053226
'M4 hnk na." WT mn&Qfl%%N@W@9. 5yl4. W.:.:,..h Nl.?
~.>. ':)yll SQih
.;.y u.,
.'$.h?g y q p$1.W S,y*g..;,y..
g)' ' MN.F wy.
- f,y,*_D:. :.> ' %
.h.:..
- ~
1.Wg s hi n.~..'
C, d
USDCNH - 2 (2/83)* N M ElO M e M N O M M?":
, 3 {...~,:;, ' r.Q. y.:u-
- _.4 v.
s 1
- 2. %.Q ri;G.omd.V f:.
l.P*Q*.
.>f.Mi.M. e*ul.. -
Wg. u y.r,,4.d ! ** 4. 3,p*,.- E,t C, M
.h ?
. " s. ;. + s' (...:s.
d
.W f*,
'% y
... t..y._a&...r r,,, e'.. 1. & * *.* Y
..... a..e..v 1.y.Qk.. n c;'
q
.a '. -
> p s,:..
.......g..
y
. y,.r.y
.4
..e-,.../.
- i s.,. <,,; ~M
{ ~ E.2 ',. $.., c'. y,
. r..
n.
.a
.4.::::..' : %.g,'!):sp;?:l.D:g. 'N,;-(-}:.:m,.
t h ',. $
n..
. y :.r yc.p. :
-y w
..7
. z ggQ:
.t, p.
y.
- .*1-y.v:.?, 4. y Mc %;&[in% Q]A.p g 2h [ p
.%.p,Q.:., t.., - v g ;.
. I Omnibus Hearing PIodeet:
. 4.ql.g.1
( ) Its
. T ). No 'F-.h.9W:@p &.M. -.8.Y,y@"q
'?YsJf.4.'ir.?. i
- ..? "cisl@?'t,W'gf... %
1 5h vL.
..: Y.
v.. s L 3.,
l, t
t.
....t),g, *. :
.,y.j*. 3#aN..*>
..K-(*...
.y
- N.
"3 ;,::,t. 2 12
.+
t,.k,.,.
., cp
[
l f
- l.....
....'.b DOrbal MYON IQ C un..st
.-m
.m.
i
' 7..,. ' n..,. ;,ms.-.
i , et 7,G, ; i M
o'
( ) Mail ho counsel'
" 1. M" [.@t 'f. (.. t 7,d..in}Jst..
M.F.';'.".W
-7:n'. E!G.h* 6&
+
., s.
.-t Y
I 4
" Y,.' i
.3 ' W' f ;; 2'. ' ei 1
... t. g g;l. * ; A.1r= stty81 -t *.4'3., -
+D, J*. '. g
,N
- w.,<1r,.q'y 3
. a.
.t
' # : Q D ' @gs..f,'gF i
N 1
.t..,
.e. i.a
-:c ~3:50?d:4-2: "i c"
-l Date/T1me:
8 9%....gse.tp*.g, cir.I.engthi T 2avY SC
]
Trial date:
a,m,,b. u. wh 1
.,',ab.f. :....
'.>g'n. f.s. (, ;,....s,,.t,Q
'Wltif.-N.r....r. 'df :s -
.y
- h tpi'**?.
1**
.g
..,. (
~ 019 G G, 0';.DI.T Q M.pd I' i:,^ B T....%.....
g.
.f g..
l 7..
Gwl $f',1'*sa,f
- v.:h..c'Qw Remarks 6$if;;;
' ' ;!QNQ~i
- .e. a. Y' x.. v
..:*
- G, m.:v 1
.w.
-<->..is.-.
4
<'.,:.,'r J. M:.:g."s.a........ m.. r..
m -
'.y n.
l
,...k. :. c.:1 ',ji l,.s.:s..
t:~; '
- w.,. :.
v.
- v.. -
- e. ::
~:.s'1 w y g.S,pc..
,~..,.x..
t r.
.u.a.
r a
]
..% :?.;..
',.*. j ;,
- s. t. Q.r.n..n.. jr - *.:.
,..Q.,,
+'
s;
.s.v
-', ' ~8.**3
' '* t s,, h: < l >..~
p[*f$&.$-E ' *
.s:.:
- e..m. :. Y.,::s,e, ~.
'b '9~"
3.
. 7.1.:.%aW : -: ' v.:- : '.,
0 7,..y..,
..,, o..
~. 'q -
j,.
< e
",UniteC.S,tates.Magia# rate 7
a,..... ~...a..~ x..
.,.,v.n.
,. x..
w v.....
.,. w...,n.
- .t.
.is....
.,.. *..m-....~
l.
=:y ?*. *' m. :'.c, ::'
Ns.,r ~&. 4. w..
..a
- ^.
.J.. V. ;
- :,_.,.,,.a ~..
.c
/ 3
- "
- g.- s : W y in:
.5.
AttorneT *-:
- w....;u.'in.#;@G;;-,:. M:.I > i.
- -7
- cc:
. /
... %. N:N
.S. Probation Thomas P. 'Ehr).M~Esqd. " C ^,
c
. I T NY-7 U.S. Max.shal MC'
' s.-.
.s.
7 Defense counsel /
with at.+. =' h"'at ic v./.J. 4 '~ * '. ".~
~
. 9...u. a, -;;.
.v
. a. s.:.: z... :o e e
N er
.,,n..J,.; e. f wai
!^
- .}y.
a.. *,..
- 4
' - =-**4**'_ ggy,y e
.e s
i
....a,
- ._...,u.,..
1iA-l v.,.:t.,
c.
.a..m
..~
L.. q...
~ ~ ~
- u. u 6._.. us. o. -, u l 5 n.t.2.
w...,
E99 6. W...
~u..m n, w c.
.w
).
r.t.r.
1,
,m
,s a,. ; u -o3 c..
i a
.:......... p.. u.1
...:-s.. ~. p 2 0 g p s;
,~
ya m
I ni1w w m
- w.....n.
z..
.w
- .a,w.na;;g h/' '
' ;; < +.
.yg
.USDCNH - 2 (2/83)
'PAGE 2 MW x,,c:.a..y. y
~
,, - ).
.y-s s
- .v.
i,
. c.
. w.;
. y...-s L..
. ~
. w.3 g;.,,,
b,. m..
U.S. DisimCT Courr sdgiigsidigragiiMPh 3 [
r UNITED STATES DISUUCT COURT JUN 14 E65 1
[
o e New n mpshire cust i
t Magistress's Deskes No.
United stases of America 85-16-01 4 L
, Case No. _Cr.
[
ORDER SPECDYING METHODS AND James Vincent Padovan CONDm0N4 0F ME f
- ===*
m eoee Part I.-Preferred Methods of Release It is hereby ORDERED that the above named defendant be reitased, provided
)
i sams.ams Persensi
. ( x ) that he prosuses to appear at all scheduled hearing as required.
I I
m Unsecured Bond
(
) that he will enscute a bond
- bmdi4g hHnself10 pay $4 United States @e sum 9I _
dollars (5
) in the event that he fails to appear as rgqvired. -
(NcTih The imanal ornser is reemese to reisene the defendans W one of the abe= aminode vaisse M #tammes that i
saca a reisans =1t aos nosomaair assure the apponessee of ine ervomem as requir=6. la s#e evens upsg n 4eierupnegeg is rpede, s
ine judinat ornser mail. amer is itse of of in ad46sme se ine nipew painede of rs6,us. imeow ins firn og46aen of rv6een lims m e mit r mmensmey aneste sne aspeernese of iae puses for snel, if ne single gemlities sive inns umfanes, my
-- or sandkiess==r Wwe.1 Pari!I. Conditions of Release Upon finding that release by one 9f the above methods will nos by itself reasonably assure the appearance of the defendans, it is hereby FURTHER OMNiRED that the defendans he released on the condinon(s) checked below; n,
Third Party
(
) (1) The defendant is placed la the custod)[of.f a 4 er custody (Name of person or or--+=Ma)
(Address)
(City and State)
Tel. No.
who asrees (a) to supervise me defendans in assordance with condidons 2 and 3 as checked below.
(b) to use every effort to assure me appearance of @e defendans as all scheduled hearings before the United States Masistrate or Court, and (c) to nodfy the Magistrate or Court immediately in the event l
the defendant violates any condition of his release or disappears, SlgRed!
i Cemeenser russy
\\
Restrictions on
(
) (2) '!he de(cadant will comply with each of the following conditions:
Travel. Associs.
I tiin or Place et Abode
~~
.n.
A
_nis/orm ir nor e esad and clo.se,.not,cr_ews he #4_dqfemdest er swe_ry e 66edia g
. e s_
I
..? _..
.. ~
l
?Nl u;.
j
. ; z.
_o_
~: i.,,
,3,
?<a ms.
T====
.o.q, Deposis
(
) (3) The defendant will execute a bond
- hinding himself to pay to the United p
) and will de' osit in the registry of.the court /
t States the sum of do lars ($
p the sum of dollars ($
), in
. being not more than 10Fs j
..-.m of the amount of the bond, auch de;> posit to be r.L.M upon the court's detarmination that
[
the defendant has performed the conditiona of his release.
p cash orserver
(
) (4) The defendant will asesme's bond
- In the amount ofdollars (5
) either 3and secured by the undertakings of suf!! ment soivent sategies or by the deposit of an equal amount of cash or other secunty inlieu thereof.
[
pero.dme
(
) (5) (a) The defendant will be released flront 3 to 3 on f
on raadiriaa that he return to custody at the sp= Mad time at such Ratesse aswr
.:===
place of canMamment as the United States Marshal shalt desisness.
OtIner Coedidoes
(
) (5) (b) The defendant agrees that he will comply with the following other enadirians of re.
fz::2-SEE CONDITIONS OF PeuE Aii Arwo i
i
' [ NOTE:A defedssa for whom condkiens of raisuse meimposed and who sher teamsp.four hours hem the thee of tas j
reisuse hamnes connenes to be dassmed as a russit of his instdity to must the condstons of rehmes, shsE. opos applicados he seanst to me.o the consinous reew.ad by thsikdient oraser =he imposed them.t-r Part III.-A;;n-== sad Penalties A pearsace It is hereby FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant shall appear nest at When and Where Ordered by the Court rm o
anm.
and at such other places and times as the United-States, Magistrate or Court may order or direct.
Pensides If the defendant violates any condition of his release, a warrant for his arrest will issue immedi-ately. After arrest, the terms and condinons of any furtherTElsase will be redetermined.
If the defendant fails to appear before any court
- ddicial officer as required, an addidonal
[
cri'aiaal case may be fa*ei==d against him. If the f
,'TB app % Tis in connection with a charge of felony, or while awaiting waraae*, or pending appeal or certiorari after convicnon, the penalty is a fine of not more than 55,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both; if he fails to appear after being re'essed on a minnemanar charge, the penalty is a fine of not more than the maxi-mum provided for the mi*dem=aar or impri<an=*at for not more than one year, or both.
(
F Part IV.-Acknowledgment by Defendant James Vincent Padcvano, understand the methnds and conditions of my release d
Acknowleditment I
o which have been checked above and the penalties and forfeiture applicable in the event I violate any condidon or fail to appear as required.
I agree to comply fully with each of the obligadons imposed on my release and to nodfy the Magistrate or Court promptly in the event I the address ed below.
W l
_~
ce
/525 Langbeard
- 'f%
)
un,.
414-784-6509 j Waukesha, WI' 53186 y
'Durform ir not a bond med door not ausse in sAr ddensinar orsurerp e edader/heessief oeilsesses se tar Undeed 2dsen.
The asummon of on Appsurance aond (Cr. pome No.17) ir maammary he orderforsush se skissess se eranat.
- .N. ' '.
_.: s.T~ M.-]c-
- , ?:";-[~
'A.:
~'
- n-
- , 'W +. f.% ( ;,i:;y. t ~. r t':y'.u t. p:.
,,.. g.a..
y e
j
,. 4. 7 0, ;.,. l: -
i O" _ 't !
e omosaso-
. t uma.a % -..
j s
't MMMM
,!}'
t, Dem June 14, 1985 1
fi 3;
1 r
ti TO THE UNITID STATES MMISEALt Your copy of the order Specifying Mahods and Coodidons of Reisme (Emil Reform Ass Form No. 3
-a*=
your authority for the comodansas of the M undi such thus a all condidcas of release are comp!!ad with. You are autherland to process t5:Valandans for reisens upon sodasados trom the clerk or Ushed Stasas magistrate that the defendans has posted bond.
ll tI You are directed to gh the defendans before the approprissa judge or magistrate as the thne II and place specified above, if the defendans is sdB la your cussody, u--
a w
MhMW f
1 I
sensem=
4 M'
4m 4 er l
\\
11 4
i
)
l l
e i
e e
,,. ~
., J. :
~
e,.;.l. L.y :m/r.; J.... +...i
. :.s.: ~.
..:- l5 m: k
..er.yS;,f
. v.w.. t ce.ty m.,y p,;,p
..,,,....m. y.y u.s. manict cour
. Osmic 7 opwa Hapa.,
n.s y.<
a
" r..:, :JUN 14 585-h i,},
3 i
q
. Cumr i
1 i
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEN EAMPSEIRE I
United States of America Crimina,1,go.85-16-01-L v.
James Vincent Padovano CONDITIONS OF RELEASE l
The release of the defendant is expressly conditioned on the following provisions:
l.
the defendant shall not commit any st1te, federal or local crime during the period he is on release; and p
i 2.
the defendant will refrain from excessiye use of alcohol, or any use of a narcotic drug de other controlled substance without a prescription of a licensed medical practitioner.
. :c,,
..f wem 4 er I.
Penalties for violating this Order l
The defendant is furthe'r instructed that should he j
f violate any of the above conditions of release, then upon 1
motion of the government, this release order may be revoked and the defendant may.be ordered detained in custody of the United States until the indictment presently pending against him is tried and disposed of.
l g
.S 1-i a
-~
,,;s -,, ;g '.,.(,
,,c;; :
.j3.c
- 3 G.
1
<r + y y r_-u w. rig.t pl33 p,,,
, g,s.
.. y s,
-.-;r f
b.lt b *:,;_', ;;.$ ' y l,;
i:.? V f.',.
y
- >l :. ;
?
t;Q
~
i t
The defendant is also insfrucy.ed that should he
['
- I o
.i knowingly fail to appear before this Court at any subsequent
[
hearing, trial *ar as otherwise required by the conditions of his release order, or knowingly fail to surrender for service of sentence if convicted, then in additionP tF any other penalties imposed by. law, the defendant may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of up to ten years and/or' a fine of j
$25,000 pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3146.
The defendant is also instructed that if he should commit a federal or state offense while on release pursuant.
to th5s order, then in addition to any sentence im sed upon him if convicted of that offense, he will also receive an additional sentence pursuant to Title 18,. United States Code, Section 3147 of not less than two years por more than ten
.d m a a,-
years if the offense for which he is convicted is a felony and a sentence of not less tha'n 90 days nor more than~one year if that offense is.a misdemeanor.
II.
Penalties for Obstructing the Criminal Process The defendant is further instructed that the provisions of the Federal Criminal Code make it a felony for any person to obstruct, impede or endeavor to obstruct or impede the due
~ ~~
administration of justice.
Specifically, the following 2/
J
~
' -~
.w i.
y w,.
.p.
sr - :./~;.n. H M. y 9 ; g 7',, -..
, re.
A.
J
/
4
,.s p.e
- e ;.,- i(. _ n : '
J J
m. ; -;
- . w.,...r S.
t 5 u.);. n,,
e i
-..,s c
1
,y provisions of Title 18 proscribe cr4=ta=1 offenses relating' to obstruction,of justices
- 1.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1503 makes it I
a felony for a person to corruptly or by means-of threats to n e,s.
attempt to infin'ence, intimidate or impede any grand juror, petit juror, or officer of.any court of the United States; P
f 2.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1510 makes it a felony to bribe or attempt to bribe any person to prevent them from communicating information to any federal criminal investigator; 3.
Title 18, United States code, Section 1512 makes it a felony to use intimidation, physical force, thr9ats or t
misleading conduct in orderto influence that person's
[
testimony, induce them to withhold eviden_ce or testimony or evade legal process; and
,/*d g,
4.
Title 18, United States code, Section 1513 makes it a felony to cause injury to any person or property or threaten to do so in order to retaliate against any witness,
)
victim or informant in a criminal proceeding.
l 1
- Copies of the statutory sections relating to obstruction of justice are appended hereto,as. Attachment A.
e 9
Oe 2b d
-:v -
e{
- r M {,py;,
.. 4 7 (
e 1
4,. -.
y,
),..j
, ;; g
>~
t'N h
,f f
- c e ede u g a
,l,, a at,e,.'] M
- wmeashater for.me h an emad pr.end.
y 3 N ha==d a -i*ri== oms-.,,, gg,,9,,, g, g,gg,,,,,,, g, p,,g,,,, '
-5.,
t er Mr t.k Whoever earvepsty, er by thnam w farve, er by j-jossed,deemsen,e og,,gj,,,,i,,,,g,g hg 'N-f,7j any enesseing seaseerammumances,and we w
,. 7D be iiheest from as andal passedag at ' ' 'c e
~,,
w S as incuesse, insenssa, et any grand o' u^
- :l i
jour, er emner la er any soort of me seek passes has been emmessed by J.
faami stuen. = emon wie msg he arring as ihgapramm w g,
7 before any g gi,g, g,g,7,,,,,,,,,, g,
-o
- 5 any amanumaapa er,esher r-m United Stanas======.-==c or eder emag ties as
- Im= enforummest esser er judge el the ~
f"M asemerssa, la the dianharge d his dary, or isjama Uniisd Sansas d laformados % m en osa.
)
m anies e possihie esandesies W a Federd d.
any sueh stead w peut jurer la his pernes o'
"""*' d "T "d3'8
- bdi'"*=*
eses w a visiansa of senddess d preha..sses. '-
- il W; 8"Q== **by*hian, or en assonat of his being er 2.
==
to p,,g,,,,g,,,, p,g,, p "_-
~
4
'_"' ".L*m"" ",I",g",;." ".d",.77
'8"';
shed he fhed set omre than 3210,000 er
~
i 1
met more ens ten years, gboth.
j i
his partes er r.,
g on assonst d the 04 Whoster haastisitair imensees an sher par.
ames of his escial dane, er ~
er by asa and thereby hindern, delays, provese, er dis. ~
q thressa er tone. er by ner thrussaming er
)
.i
""*'3=* any perses trear-.
sommaahe== ladsences, obsencia, er impeden.
C)===ading er tendtytag b as escal pre 1
er endeavors ta inounce. decruet. er inspede. the due adrainiscrudes d jussion shan be Seed not ensdag:
(Il reperdag to a hw entenement esser er h
more thaa 88.000 or ' ri
' set more thma See judge of the Uahed Stasas the esamesion er funes, or bech.
passible w :-- et a Federal effense er a venisons of esentiene et probaden, pneela, et reimme peedlag beimal r -
"7 e anweer er imidag h anon of a.eear pernes b esaassuma with.s Federal effensa er (45 musing a artedaal r _ Ma, er a parole i
E 1510. obser. eden er erimient levendsm-(
i er roomnoe pneesding, ta be sought tiesa ted, er assistiatla such preseration et er (a) Whoever winfuny endesvors by sans of pmeedingt.
p heibery to obetruct. delar, w prevent the conunani.
er essempts is de se, shan be fined not more than
[
f' encon of hformanon re(ac'ag to a violasion of any g:5.000 et hapneeeed eN mere then een year, er armamai stasate d the United Stasas by esy persos bash.
to a annuns1invandgasar shnu be fined nos more
.than 33,000, or :.q,.D ' not more than five (egta a
" ~ for an egense andes ele P
r _- - -
sustine it is as aff!rmstree defemme. as to whash the 2 ears, er bash.
defamenet has the burden of proof by a propender*.
(b) Aa esse la this seensa, the tarta "cruminal anae of the ev*isosawat the esadua mesisted 4
means my ineinimal daly mach==se seiely of In=%1 ese(9M and ths,the defendant's f
i 4 -.s he a I.4;..w ;t. apacy, er armed force of the sole lesasties was en._ _.-duca, er muse Ifnited Saasas to esoduct er engsp la invesagn.
the asher perses ad landfy trutatany.
tions et av pressentions for talanons W the crums.
. (d) Tw the perpenes et thin asensa.-
h
~
ad laws of the United States.
l
- 0) na smast r--
J g need om be pending L
~
er aheet to be lesdtated at the tiam d de
- offenset and III the tethmony. er b nord, derament, et I 151:' Tampering,tm a we a,seum, or }
dA Oi' *"d *** h* *d"i*'ible in wence er bee of a cinha of privGege as latermant (e) la & rcd for an effense ander this N Whee,or knowmgiy essa incieddatos er
- '* ** "St* d mind imod be preved with prsical fores, or thmtens amether person, or u.
respect to the armastaaee. -
tempts to do se, or unpres ha taisleadsag coeduct W,that the oscial pressed!ag before a fadp.
taward another persen, with latant td>
esers magistrata, psad krf, or government G) Influence h tendenony of saf persea is na scosy is tufore a Judge or'eemet W tme Umsed ;
N ro m din c 5: stas. a Unhed Stasse tangistrata, a bankruptcy i P
G1 cause or Induce may perses tem bdge. a Federal gesad bry, or a Federal Govern.
(A) withhold tandmony, or widhold a ree.
'smat aguey: w ad documat, or other dject, kom an otacial GI that the hdre fs a bdp of the United
'I-Ec 5tasas er that the law aforcement ofncer la na F - deer, descrey,i (B) matcata, w eenemal na effleer er entployee of the Federal Government -
diwt with Catant to mpair the dject's lategrt,
-' ' or a person authorized ta set for or se baalf of
~
the Feders! Cevernment w serving the Federal 1
Geeernment as na adviser or eenswama.
/ ! ')6 (f).Tbwe le aurstarrheeial Fedent M 9 over na offense,.undet th.is nation.~.
.~
nu s e e s.
.. :n. - : /- -
~ m s -,..
~.
4..
.,;. x.. :.-.
m Y
i
.'7 Y
p a
%t<D%#:%:@gfy$4i*
A
- ~,3...
,. e:. m $ y.@ M.R
,ug. 4.y.,
..w ;
n v
.. M. -
y!"
. y!;-
QV My
$PL 9~
5:Th wj [
3~
y.
6
.~.k.'i.x%.:M$i. 4&.
.... m%.o.... _ m&..g. Q.a 3, I J'@
i.
~
x.,
<...: w,dc a.sSt
+.
- a..w#,y
.,. W.
. c.
g p
,.4
- f..f
-.m,c.t 3
.m
.m. i r : n.,.n.c. m.~. w :u:<s. -
s
.:%w.fffhyff
- c..
pQ n.a
=.
t m,.
i 2
f k$.5.5 -
fyfi.
re c%..,
s.c w we,..a
.x..;ES@Ms@6%%
e M.g.
&a. C.
s#
K,4;%
"Mit
- ="
~y
~
v s.Q:... w*.VR,.% 9 i
w:
4 a br..m
%c m
- m. ".
w+ r 3,
Mt
. r.
sw
>i'.g.7,s! ?"*:.';'st.. M.% -
3
..}*..
. ;Q '
Y.,y e
a.;?A!r?.W.Y..Ehr g. " ^
5*h.
n%.:
. n..,
. a
.e....#%,
k t
v Y
qtK, y,.g. &a. -3 gpr;gy.M.a c ~ ~4'"j%itg..,y~(
1 ?l f
6s.pg 1 9-
. f 15LT. amaw=r.s.,.~,-esemiai n.,e Pp~dy. lisd[g..
s.
e a
r
,p
- 7. c.,,,, w,,,gj g
~ w wn.--==-=6r.i&c.. ; ne,
41 M & W -k l
$% WM % &&&.4 M p'*f s
X. g"o.1.c. b ?. ww$ q}ft*.*i
. ;Y -
f
'4-j
- z. *
- ~ er A-m= the mestie.
- , ~
b'
',Q
- Q C,
. m theassadamme%c.iidr...,iaang
~
..ng% h l,
x eessist ps andias,'er:aar-emagemer; tasasMpdi*-@d9' s.
,U Uim D $:d
.W D.
f
- p. WF(,N QM
'N D.I 5
- gII, b
.S I"j,(. *i'2
,h3> M EE M f
7 a,
,.ap.w, g.
- {
4;.
,g, m.co., w 4. r,ne. p.
w,. aw,,
ga'hlJsN""inhh.C.g** 'd/'M C
W
- i.
- M,$$
4ti's
' ; er essauseine esa.Fede' rat' pM M
.M MM,.
+Y Nc.f f -
5
.@M F dMM.O'MMIf:M
~
suisuse puedesiedleinllpr==8* Tai h
. ersaamps es de se, shaEbe4ms(secesse thes.N%'*h f?
i s
WY
'Y
.N h h !*',,~-
W M M.d
.$ 7 TP
% % ?! N. T $ ['f d 6* b boCMF,5!.L.rgggg@fmi:r.;g%juismaa i y
m r.as eras,= w this w i.4. m.;: p; W
@"%2niW.99WM 0
. m n.e==.aarren iner hwee,.<k.m.. g&
. m.
W !.,[ $.,Y.N.T'. [fj Q @h ~ % kj_, g g h ",'*%:f
E.*.%. l-J*l L.*NG(~f *& es w.c.u.y#QP
, h
. w. m->.
.x E
.J'
%:s. r *
'Q,-
' 'Q ng;-
Virhi'A
' [
f
'a'
- h
- :.$ *, Y Y t '. e,:%
X
- -,.l.V Q.- M. m
.wp
- ^l
-*J:
- . m W $. 7 "..
..P. :.l XMc,yf. 4._5..*.
.W. e:c'2,lq.W5.P.5.h.W.. TW '5:n ' N.
M-
~
3 s-
. *hh' "t
. h.f
,' %Y
,s s,
N..
' ' '.?,.Q. lM:.mQ.- e.n.s
- w. ' d i( Q) f c$1 f.
. %g$.y.: w n -.9.%.n.;,.4%xv.m 2...
a
< h. :... -..$.,,$.*
., n.
s.
s
.w c-w :.-
?. f Y -
f$ ** *f;)m;$. *.'s,,9l N'.,~
,!"S*:/g,.4
.' r
_ ':;Yl :..$. c.,[:,,
.. l, ' *5)-
2 n
- y
.vgrw.- t; o.
.,.h
, Qs;.
, K ' *[, Q '
- s.D: -.
- -[ s.
'D...
j:l'* f.%):J.k"*e[g.e.O-v. Y,,.Ci 'W.e.
b
,4o'. ~,M.
p',..- f;. c e t.s,. c..
.y.. :.
..&m. l*
2
.. a ;..l* *: f.;,;..,% i;/.? 'W W.
Q ';)~
JD '
.ri,",.
..r'.-~.. '.
., i d ',
s
. O..
y s :,,...<',ss-
.. vo ', *ii.'" ' 'W f:.r....,*
Q' !.-fl f.: *
- A ? * ;; *,
~:
,.I
^
~ * ~
...'. 1,..y %, #.'Y.::~:f K.,,e'g%eh
'f*:fy.s.'.Wf*. n.f
~ b;,
Y. ' 'lw\\ r* *::4.*.s f+',kQ W'
".,.* g1., 9 w ;r;),,
% '.V3 ?
M~
l-d
?
..~, Q s :*.
- ~.
-4*
)-
r.% Ce.
s Iw
.,es s
's c.
c.
M
,Ir.
}
- h
'#D,Y T@.M:;.:;M,M..n'.,.d..e:.y;.eN$h. 985 *$$
+
n Q
. g.fix > ;,, n v.w.V ;~y ~ -e..
.n :.p.._.h.,e a.* M.r.ww r % ys,y see A.~ : -... - g,,
-. c.-
- ?..p g O d E hkhf MD
- k. h M..< Q.,./. :
i.
EL'
,.t, y. 1 ;p. '
.;,M,7.T i p,..a..,_.q h.g.d'.p,,U.,.*,'.. (. $..f., o.9. *-) f,Wp k,.,.
.t
.(.y p
y Q H,9 1
- }
, ;.~ '
<.;;S,.,
..a '
u Y
I J,'j'7.p'#",C';. A,t.j.br ;(g<,:.g;5,3. p.,;,,,,,, },
.c
,lL 4
1,,t, (. ;.,,
1,,
.~
t a
c,,
g.
.c,g..,
, i{'9
' i
- D.
,,,a,,
- y f' *,3 g,
' [,
- it,
}
'w,.,.:~.',.
4, j *,c...... 'c.w JJ.yp n,
s t a.. p.
-f pf.*.,-\\.
. :. a s-o'
, '. k.'.t.
t t *. l, N; ; ' '-
6,
- }
- - ),),i.t-
.. e-
'. c ;.
'q',
{.
. y *y r-t
)
i r
- 1. '
.r b
United States.Magistr i
/
,,. m
._ b_,,,, -
J anAnng
~
1 a
(.
i.
, =. =
m ense co=_==e!
June 14, 1985 cc:
United States Attorney United States Marshal United States Probation Y Defense Counsel T
.4 W ad ar-t l
r a
s 8
ee aus ame' 0
e
.a r
g*
e v
I, L
~
w -
- +
.~.
-r
. m.
- 3..
~.
~, _
J "h.,
. ~, r.,.. p.' -
-31:.yyp;e
... :.. M_.4,.. n >. -
. ".:g>.igt. :. 2 Y W n.
~.,'
.w r; :
,.G..m. i,:'..
- f. y,. :,. jj,
. y.
);f9l{.-s.n,7,;\\gs,f'pn. 0? l f 3 gn.;..:(.,E.
..,.S; i
.t.
1axx Ea. Usk-172 (ser. 10-L W
'.l,'
- .SDNHORS,
i
~
J Tc.',: <.. ' O.t.,f. '@.S;,.y {
PBAECIPR'Fm.:HEIRlWB 1:i.Q?.Y.,:$H
..,.,,y,.
4,,,,.,. g
.. :M.:-@...'
.4 li. b :
P<
y
+N COURE.,..' 4
.v...
'. J i M 2,...!S_..,,
u 2N 255 UnctIED. 3"J' lSB _..
- .. - ~,
~ ag3333cr QF. 2 wm m a t u -
+
. :.,J '.>.
..s.7.
,s - DIVI 5ZCN -
c, s.
a
..l*~
J,..
,f
}., 4..,,. q,;, 's t'n-UgEIED 824gg3 gy mm'r's
-l-'
j
. I.50-' Cr-e 01)
~
Mc-.
,[~ (la USC 5 10
~^
ss.
E ;i.:n I..
a..< ~.
.x
. t. 2,. ~.. m.
..; ~ ? -
I f.'..
I
- g,.;.' >: N.-
';.; h
,j-V.
'.?g,.,;.{=.
' V f-
- w...,
. summons the cLart at saia cours v12.1 issue MuseusK, as
~.
- .a semanst the store-nammi desand m.
x n netment -
Tiscommast.as or M atanutsJ .Smrinsteam file
.ca. -
a
... :. 3...,.,.
dar ac _ June a,,19,,,,s,5,,.
.,4 s..
19.,gi.
.e.
_ der at June a
4th zns. _
- -::a g e t
s.
-.,,p. y
%U,
(
h
- - saw m,e~n y i
y
$gy.
Susmosss Mampast %ssmeds _
525 tongtssard 4 &=sisse.19% 53196 Thomas P, E8#, %gqKtts'<.,',
Efst 6 stars strite 164 933 L Neydfets 96akt.
- za MtL.t= & Ms14Z 53226
.,8 P
3,
.g 4*
e 4
' l' r
h.
s g~
r I
l
.h t
l-[3:.
}
- f.z
- .q_.. ;,Q... *
.:.9
. f,
.vppp.ng.v.a.:.p. an.t.3pcp.,,
g.
.,,.m..,.,..%..
,, S-,
p.
.g,5,t...
!.,.,r. c... 3 3, t.at
,i
. &v.x. s.<f,fff 45.
. :w
.. :l f f
. <., l *-l
" L;
's :
.% / [.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Mi.5 c.-
j FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW <BAMPSEIRE g-j.;212,M
. j,].
..'r 4
- n.a. '
.?
- :- r
- c. n'...
w.w
.S,.3 t
c,. 3,. ;',.
=S..
a 4
f United States of America i.,,.in ' ' -
4.
W:
Ci vi.'r CR 8 5 01 d.
-3....,3 ;
4 (18 U.S.C. 5 1001)
' d-i James vincent Padavano E
4 f
)
~,
, re.
The Grand Jury charges:
' 9 c' /'
on or about the dates set forth in the counts'of this indictment listed below and all occurring {within the D.istrict.of New Hampshire and all in matters within _the jurisdictio' n of the.
i
- 2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an Agency of the United States, N
JAMES VINCENT PADAVANO, did willfully and' knowingly mid;e and use' e
false writings and documents containing materi. ally' false, ficti-
~.
^
' '. f.,:..-
~
tious and fraudulent statements, knowing' the.same to contain such -
\\
w otatements, in that the defendant ~ caused.to'be-submitted to the -
L i
Pullman Eiggins Campany, a subcontractor at.the Seabrook Nuclear 5
l J.
Power Station, completed Reports of "Liquidbtammt Examinations I
B allegedly performed by the defendant on certain welds of piping cystems in Seabrook Station when, as the defendant then and there
(;
well knew, the Liquid Penetrant Examinations reflected in said reports had not been performed.
3' i
l Count Field Wald Date of 9
Report 3
l Number Number 3
e.;
l 1
FW 4600 - 1406
.- 3-15-83
+-
i
(
2 FW 4600 - T407 3-2-83 d
v
(&;
ry W
g$
i
.i.
o
~
y w
}
- g. e.
.., - - ;.,.s n
.g.
.., c r.
. 2.m.~,p..,...g...., yg,7.g,..
.s.
,'r G I 'O' 2 -[,s.l:
I
- q..,q g;. s.v,,.,,. '.[.
61.;b',': #
_26
. :..H M
,e
. g 7 y.
..,._ 3.;,,,
'c
' Count, riald Weld 5 T >s'.9. ::;? i Date.of ~, fi ;9 '.
,; i :
f,'
l Report
_ 77.,. },.,
{
'r,N
^ '
Number Number 1
>r 3
m 4601 - 1102.
6.J..
.. ' l 3-3-8 3 - M, " *.
- s..
~ 3-3-83."r
' ~; /.. '
~
'4 N 4601 - 1103 t.
5 m 4601 - 1106 3-3-83 -l' 5W 1803 - 0202 2-17-83
- ~
i.
~
6 v
7 SF 1803 - 0203
'.7 3d3-8 3 - e '
t-
- L l
7-30-82.-
l
~~
8 BC 801 - 0101 10-23-82. L 9
'CS 465 - 0101 NE 1656'- 0106 2-28-83 10 11 DG 4419 - 0307
~
1-17-83 All in violation of Title 18,. United States Code, Secti.on 1001.
c.
....';A. True Bill,,
o n
1 Fofesu
/
y,,
.sf wun ad ar-hb
%M Bruce E.
Kenna
(
United States Attorney i,
Ricnard F.
Jongston Assistant U.S. Attorney O
1 l
l i
F
-- v
,-1~ j ' ~'
,,, Q,.
A. W M j.z.y....i;.Lu,._.. _.;,, a.,A,
%W u.
..'s d
e 4
L m..
)
,f
.)
/
i l
w
. A2 Tmtson.Smciant 18.1986--... s s
_, THr Tennem ensy 8
1 THEWASHINGTON PostINDEX 3
i MARY MCGRORY 1,
Fighting for Survival ~ of th6 Unfit I;
teven Comley, a stocky.
, bodie where the residents do a lot of aaMaMag man from Rowicy.
Bower growing and bird-watching. He Mass is hardly of the Clarit has spent $12.000 to $15,000 and is Chflord school cd lobbying. Surve be is ready to spend more because he's"so not. He berges into.
w offices ashamed I didn't get involved before.-
I med says.*Why the ben...?' He does "A lot of pec;de can me a nut
- he E
not see aanhhing friendly relat2ons as - volunteers.
a ra*aarwe of =* cam *1 made him mad If he is, he could scarcely be rnore M
l as hafl"he reports about a of-themrag than the evacuation l
congr-t aide whom he was trying proposals he is protestag. !n the wake to persuade to avestante the Nuclear of Chernobyt. Sununu engaged a Reguistory ""
disttormshed scentzfic pane.l. including He deals as brusquely with the press.
two Nobet taurestes, to advise fum When he faas to persuade a reporter to about the safety of Seabrook. They
- p.,
cover one d his initiatives, he says, have assured hun that in terms of
- 0h. sure. you'D want untd there are a--.i operataca and what ther 500.000 dead, then you'S go for it
- prefer to cau *the emergency response Ever nace Chernobylla=vhed plan.* thmgs could not be better. -
him *1ike an unguided ausade.* a "What's he tellin' us.* snorts Comley.
fnend anyo-be has been charsms "They have human error at Three Mde about kt a solo effort to stop the Island and in Russa, but they don't
?a it " i have it in New Harnpahire!"
j, eh.
opening of Seabrook. the nuclear power '
plant that !ies 12 mGes from the nursag The 17 towns a New Hampshire and M'. '.7 1
bone be owns and operates in Rowter.
the not a Manauwetts mthan a
. u.
Iirst he ranged the town of 4,000 10 inde radius of the nuclear plant 35
~#
I Deng up 1.400 rendents to agn a have draft p&ans, and the sarna brigM petinan to Goe. M aa*3 S. D* aba (D) thrend of luancy runs through them.
d===adias that Rowter be --wed in Parenta are, for instance. instructed not evamanaa plans besos drawn up in the to try to retneve their chkren from event of a Seabrook wreat Then he ' school d the sirens go off. Their young went to the State House in Bosten to will be taken to other towns by bus.
badger Dukakas in person not to t kay Comley's two sons attend a restonal the piano-e move that would lush schoolin Peabody that is withe effecovety keep Seabrook inoperative.
the 10 mde radius and so would be Whde his wife runs Ses View.
under the orders of the Emergency Cooney darts is and out of Washington.
Operstaens Center, which presency has a, He h=aen the ah of the NRC and no junsdaction in Rowley.
peppers the comnusariners mth letters.
Tom Moughan, coordanator of He had as interview with the newest Citzaens Withm the Ten-Mde Radius.
appomtee. James K. Assettme.dut1og poets out that some draits cau for the which Assettine concrded that the dispatch of cry buses frem Boston.
- acted more as the some 40 mdes away, to pack up procactorof theindustrythaathe stragglers and people mthout cars.
protactar of the public."
There a talk of harms carless people L;he every other Washeston put nbbons on their doorknobs. But petitioner Condey wants to see the -
smca the buses-provided enough prewdent. A registered independent, he dnvers can be found to head into the bas voted for and contnbuted to Ronald fauout-mD ply anty certain routes.
Resgaa and be thinks that if he could residents of sade streets mu have to run i
sa down with him, the pr*=Aas would to the corner and, as Moughan says.
- have* to stop Seabrook.
- hope that the bus wdl get them before t
He's had no luck. so he's taking his the rmhacon does.*
pies aloft agam. Condef. a skydrvef.
What keepe Comley gomg at hrs believes in overdights. He has lured headlong pace are the plans for nursing planes to Oy over Bostos to goed home and hospital patients." hich.* as Dukakis, and over Concord. N.lt ta the Newburyport drafa says.*cannot be disparare Goe. John H. Susuna (R).
. moved.*
who is fendmg off a vigorous reelection The Darwinian instruenons advise challenge from sat >Seabrook elements.
shutting docrs. windows and outside air The presadent may soon see a streamer vents, and
- moving patients / residents to y-op to the clouds t! sat says. 'Mr.
inner room /hauways d possMe.*
Presadent. See Me. Comley.*
"What the hed lund of a way is that to Coadey pays for all tius acovity with treat your mother or your grandfather!*
his own money. Sea View is a arsau-asks Comley. None of the smart people l
'that's why it's so good *-nursang he 6s pestenng has answered him yet.
m.
b 4
10-27-86
'IO THE PEOPLE OF NEN HAMPSHIRE a
I am a resident of Ibwley, Massachusetts which lies 2 miles outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius. I am also the administrator of the Sea View Nursing hme in Fowley. My family has been in the nursing hme profession for over 40 years.
We really became concerned in the Seabrook issue when wa found out that there is not an acceptable evacuation plan for people who cannot be moved. @is includes children hospitalized for surgery who must be sheltered in place because it sculd be dangerous to nove thcm. We only neans of care is providing a bottle of iodine as well as expecting volunteers to stay behind and care for these people. Our town also found out that m could not be included in the evacuation planning even though our young people attend school within the 10 mile radius because they go to a regional school in Newbury, Mass. Since being confronted with these kinds of UN-American practices, I concluded that it was not only the industry that was encouraging this but the Nuclear Regulatory Ccnmission, which led me to believe that the real stench was ccming frun Washington.
During my weeks in Washington, D.
C., this was confirmed.
I uncovered sme very E
disturbing information regarding the safety and viability of nuclear oower clants in the United States, including our neighbor Seabrook. For instance, James K. Asselstine, an NRC Commissioner, has told me in a formal meeting that he has information which supports his assertion that there will be a serious nuclear accident in the United States within the next 20 years, which he admits can happen today and could result in off-site releases of radiation larger than occurred at Chernobyl, unless comething is done now to investigate truthfully and regulate conscientiously the nuclear power industry.
Mr. Asselstine feels that the present Administration in the NRC is more of a protector of the industry than of the people.
I was also informed by another NRC official that the Seabrook Plant was built in the wrong location and should never be started up.
I have also learned of the case of James V. Padovano, whose sole nosition was to inspect welds at the Seabrook plant. He was charged with 11 counts of Federal violations frcm 7-30-82 to 3-15-83 and pleaded guilty and was sentenced 9-30-85.
He was sent to jail for 6 months and then placed on 3 years probation. Wese charges were for not performing inspection of weld and falsifying the records to show that he did perform the inspections. Seabrook will say that this is old news and they took care of it, but since you, the public, are not aware of it, it cannot be old news.
The Padovano case should have been fully investigated but was plea-bargained and 9 counts wre dismissed with prejudice. %ere are also other people who should have testified, co-workers of Padovano, but they were never asked to testify. I think the least the Department of Justice could have done was to fully investigate the case and let all witnesses be questioned.
I have asked for this case to be re-coened in Washington through the Justice Depart: ment. Seabrook officials admit that due to Mr. Padovano's gross neglect and lack of concern for the safety of the people of Anerica, it oost over one million dollars to go back to check over Mr. Padovano's work. More importantly, scme of the inspections that he was recuired to be performing could never be re-inspected as they were already covered in cement. Recently, the NRC granted 11 pages of inspection relief pertaining to current welds, even though the NRC's own regulations require 100% examination. This was found in Exhibit 5 of the NBC Safety Evaluation Report of July 1986 which was presented at the Seabrook hearings held at the Portsmouth Circle on 9-29-86.
This was because Seabrook had such a good performance record. Given the Padovano case and given what had happened at Chernobyl, I think all the welds should be checked 200% let alone not checking N
sme of them at all. Again, this shows that the NRC istrecresenting the industry,
/
not the safety of the public. I contacted Governor Sununu's office by registered mail on October 15, 1986 requesting him to make public sme of the thinas I had found in Washington as well as making public the James Dadovano case. His office informed me that they did not know of the case and that they didn't think there would be enough time to do this before election. Your Mr. Sununu is using the Governor's office to represent the industry and not the people. Either this man is blind, misinformed or a crook. Mr. Sununu does not have the right to decide for the t
//4
0
$d N h000 lbr fAdw k$s a0 t
0, g
O cr 80 th rou4h Aff V. if th.
I Mm.
I'm fl
- I er Sumsm has elected not to answer my letters before the election.
Stephen Omiley, A&ninistrator of Sea View tn2rsing Itme in Ibwley, Itissachusetts y
h and I've decided to ask Cbvernor Suwsm sme questions publicly. He have a right First, how can you say that Seabrook is not the nein issue to know his responses.
uten it could jeopardize all you've wrked for and more importantly, all the people have wrked for and love? Secondly, givm Omrnobyl Alch affected cows in Vermont how can you i%...~.J we stay within a 10-mile radius yet still ensure public safetyRi And isn't it m1y right that the reople decide the fleabrook issue instead of you, Don't you consider it conflict of interes*
Owernor Smunu and the inzlear industry?
to take noney frun Seabrook owners and at the sane tise give overwtw1 ming styport to the opening of the plant? And why aren't you aware of tre Janes Padovaro case, a former Seabrook welding inspector who pleaded guilty and went to jail for falsifyis welding records at the plant? I appeal to you Qwernor Stzwsm to start representing I
the people, rather than just tie nuclear industry.
N Announcer Paid for by Stephen Omley.
The atove was aired on the following stations:
i E
CML 1rrIntS,
CML tutEftS IIEAT104 i Of' TIMS 8
WZID FM 95.7 Ptinchester Manchester 8
WFT:A M 1370 NGIR M 61.0 ttinchester 24 NGB fM 7 100 vortsnouth 6
Nmn M 75 tbrtmouth '
10 WKE M 14.50 Concord 12 WKE EM 102.3' Oxxord 12 f
I KJYY 105.5 Oxxord 8
R NOFO 97.5 Dover WCEA-M 14.50 tkMairyport 15 Nt;1R-AM 603-625-6915 revin Itamilton, tw Director Jtaly Glovsky, General ttinaaer NEB 603-436-7300 Mike Itickan, tw Director Inx 120 lafayette it].
s ' Portanouth, N. II. 03801 Bob Shepphard WKE 601-225-5521 Richard W. Osborne, President Mr. Rivers, talk strw host, 603-224-1450 M7YY 603-228-9036 Jerry 1.ittle, tw Director Noro 603-742-7060 Carl Stevens, tiew Director Miss Daniels (asked questims at debate)
N21M 603-669-5777 Allen "eduzzi, tw Director D-M Peter teordrd, Sales Ptinager Jane E. Valliere, tw Director I
dwinnel 21 NtaTr '1V 603-225-2100 laurie Arderson, Assistant j
to p i dismal 9 wtm-TV 603-623-8061 lcmi hant
,.r. f ath Miles pesnick, Station fannaaer L
/A
.5
- . sees came
-ca Vol 230: No.126 MONDAY. NOVD10ER 3.19t36 64 PageS + 25 cenis nw Final move;s in Mass., XH. elections Seabrook plant figures as niajor issue '
Candidates exchange salvos on TV
\\
By John Eftement and John Milne brtng reeserted to a third term. Drmer dy Joan Vennerht Kartorts and Dukakis were the only Giobe Stati ents anse have tried to make nuclear and Andrew Datulle statewide candklates who did not partici-power an4 ats wasee an assue en the tJS Globe Stasi pote en a sertes es televtsed short debates SALEM. '8 it - Shselded by umbrellas Senate raae nd be on WCVB-TV ICh. 5L Karlotta. an under-dog who is runnsnt 50 points behind Du-The Sakm prosesters made Sununu s era Duk s ca paig P tond i
er wnc kers who were recovering air a kakis an posts. was tuote than wilung to home the end ad a mock trip. drugned debatt but Dukakis declined.
king d.av of woratng the phone bank, etty protest a atast t cabrop n evacuanon joute unsate Organuers saad
,, im with the Dume' buttons But "I don t thmk you can solve anything Po*" P at-The vigil was part of a new crupe", m,ut 75 peopse Wars the protest. but en mMWh M a mMW" ppW Mdm thev broke op m groups betor* ti ev ar-c,o,q, g,,iotts gamet, strode from bar-yesserday, adding that he expects to be of anst Scatroom activity this past wees rived at theg governor s house Sununu stoni to borstooi yesterday at a Charles " charging hard" today, the last day of f
aimed at swaying voters on what oppo-wasa t at h$me - he attended a cam-Street bar en one of his final campaigra the casapaign.
nents of the nucicar power plant say is poign rweptR>n en Kingston - and atter swm(s before election day in Masachu-Karmne sand he was fulfng opumte-the naapor issue an tomorrow's New atmut 45 mesites. the demonstrators s us tenormw Hampehare ewetiost.
went home.
tie, despete the poHs and tbe bed weather a
p ans to he l
m to[
Antt$cabrook activists ptoced news.
. Doria Mc
. 40. of Salem, one of the Meanwhile. Cov Dukakis said he was paper advertisements and bought radse praecoters. uts the antmucerar snove-not campaignmg yesterday Instead, m i
and televisaon time to.get out messages snent drew her to vose Drmnerane for the Framer:gharn. he annwnced that the I
that weren t formasty knked to the cans. second time m her hie. The strst was for state wouks pay s6 milliosa to purchase feat. he was welung to discuss vietary in peign of Democrat Paul McEacherrL a Sen Eugene l&Carthy. westng the t%8 157 acres os farmland for conservation tunis aha than beaung Dukakis He
-hat -. mme - -
-r.k.
.h.. tt,.g I. -
-r-.r--t --m p.,-.n - ~ -.
vent Seabroom advocate %nunu from NEW HAMPSHIRE. Page 22 the area from a. ~y.a..t.
MASSACHtJSETTS6Page 22 l
2*.
I g
E.Futur' of Seabrook nuclear plant key issue in X.H. election.
l e
A*W NEW RAMPSil1RE Seabrook more then support of for the Senate. said the study by tag." he said. "I think 1t 11 he a nuclear dump este. Maynard thern said. "Tve never enet the
(.Cusettssued frans Page 23 McEachern. although seed they the House intenor sutrornmsttre mouth higher.*.
raised S4.000 in ses days to pay mast"
=
.wouad vase Demorr_atte.. _.was "t_he smoking gun
- tha.t
.i t.n h..
b..n.rt t..t..d,try
__ ads from bake sales and. -s _ --
'o Although the rauclear indus for the
..!. _ _t _t M k..
sn_ _.n a
.c
.ns.t s_rk_
..t.
.h.w.
_ m _..n
.t.. stand tiecause fue s2 ways been are the narne small group that has twe ethers en Maine stett are under heavy handed poesticking, it has "It's a siew kne for mie."'ene takers out by a group ef 700 teach-
.2 ogeense Scabrtick, inst I snever lent agttated against Seabrook over consederantosi The admanestra-nos lent knunu overt support. sand. "I fets so much frustractoss at era en the Seacoast arts sovtng
- : the neowement my support." said the snese than a derade the S4 8 taan. Pentmusy said in Manchemer.
"I'm glad they we brera queet.~ said not bring able to maske my vasce
- 'in the event of a iseeJor acendent.
.. MtLend. % here & anL standing bishose power piant has been un-decided to help ciert Repubik ans Sununu Seatrook's maan owner, heard. and every night turning on at Seabrook." the advertisement
. Isa time ratas "
der construction. Asked yesacrday and saw to heft with the penpoe of Pubtle Srrvere Co. of New Hamp-Ihe news and seeeng Covernot said. "no plan could guarantee the McEachern sand he was sur-en Kingstess about the ants Sea-Psew Hasnpsnaref shore, has bren running conserva. Sununu's coenmercials and not safety' of 15.000 area students.
- pseurtL *'t apprettate what thev re troot activism. Sununu saaet. "It Rudman saed yesterdav the tion ads and the LJS Corgimsttee on hearing a word about what I think Herbert Mover of Exeter.,a long-dieng," McEachern seus en an wa-shows that even they don t hke dump was ksited tecnnerativ and Energy Awareness has been send-la the crtsas issue of this cane. these Seatwook opponent who lead y
errverw. "but I wash they d gtve Paui McEachern?
ftnanv bv Congress detries.g funds eng prarnucerar speakers around peigray the drive. said he had raised use the meaney instead "
Murtear power became an ensue for the East Cuest sese. 7e never to newspapers. but there has bren a Psewspaper advertisements 96.000 frnne teachere to pay for g
I advertisemeists.
Sunnsnas holds a beg lead he the tn tre tJS Senate race yesterday as thought we couki won this usee pur rio response to the antanuctrar ac.
In the $rmeast ares purchaard by g=dts and McEachern mades say wett. but the debate ranged over a Istically, and i don t think we tivesne that encluded.
cler. They perture an evacuation e Radio advertisements bought l
i Donak$ S. Robee. an Exeter finan-their only chance to to tap the nrw congressaonal study that said would have by forcing the admm-e Television and radle ads as-
- .. ants Seabrook ferver. The ostly the trS Department of Energy had tserasioen to choone us over the tacking %nunu and Seabrook stren and say "It doesa t snean a y Stephen Comely, a nursing
.. way to etn. McEachern smad. to if suspended a search for a duenp for Wess.* he said.
that saar.Joya Maynard Orthet. a nuclear acendent wtn happen but hasne admmistrator frone Rowley, p'
- tine governor's adherents stay hagfily radioactive waste on the Sununu predicted a turnout
=nter and resident of Hillsboro it sneans a nuclear acendent couks Masa who pant another 36.000
- ,. away froen the pons while anst-East Comet because the dectsson niuch greater than the "100 000 who becasne an antl-Seabrook. happert That fact scares srie so' for 120 ads ors IO stations that b
- SSentnoot activists get eut their would heie Republicans at the vosers. Just over 50 permit. than antFSununa activist after the US l'as voting for Paul McEachern on sand. "'I appeal to yota. Covernor p
.;wates. The antFSeabroolt activ-polls = not that It wassa't needed.
Secretary of State Wllitam S.
Drpartment cd Energy decided to Nav. 4."
Sununia. to start representing the
- , tats a.m a J yesterday. smad Endicott "Jentedy, the former Cardner sue,gested. "We we got a consider a 71Fsquare-mtle area of Rober could rnot be reached for People rather thasapast the smele-3 they acted from constetson atinut M===achusetta governor nannsng gud get< mat-the-vose operation go-snuthwesterra New Hampshire as Comment yysterday and McEa. at Industry "
4 g a
t
,e -g r.
! E h,,,* ; M @na,:Nh,k,hbD,g ;,;n$,,3$,MN, MN
- m.%.m.; m..g.g + y ; i.
w c
2'.r; g
- y. u ;:c
, e
O m/-
,N,ew amosaire
'Fec-Vocajona "ecanica Co ege Mcfg at Vancaeter to66 FRONT STREET e MANCHESTER NH o31o2 + (6o3) 668 67o6 6 c46.#4JFdlw C A I. n a Jr. Al. y im LL w netober 24, 1986 M
'j ^
& Nursikg N '
@jk
^ ^
^
Stephen B.
Cemle" Sea View Convalescent Home e
Mane 1on Drive 1 A w Ja
"~~'44 Rowlev, Massachusetts 01969 ff E f'
=
f [ h 'pla,j,
Dear Mr. Comlev:
l f
Th an k vou for uour lette* of October 21st.
I appreciate veur willingness to share the materials uou have proviced the e:liega.
As an educational institu* on we feel a responsibilitu
- t orootde curren* in'ormation regeding all manner of issue = for tqe increased swareness. o'
+ 1 arr o u s 'commu n t t v.
Please be aware that our policy is to provice equal space and time to all viewpoints on a par ticular issue.
Acceptance of the materials you have proviced does not constitute endorsement of your position on this issue ov anv member of this campus community.
I have sent the materi als to the college Learning Resource Center where they will be available to our campus community and the public at-l arge.
If you have ano questions regarding the action I have taken with i
respect to this matter please contact me.
Again, vour contribution to the knowledge base of our campus is appreciated.
Sincerely.
Pichardk.Madeville, Prestdent f
O aen 3an cc: James A. Pietrovito, Dean of Community Education Reginald Comeau, Director, Learning Resource Center
]MC
- - ---l
it.
P IT'S YOUR FUTURE' ATTENTION NEW HAMPSHIRE STUDENTS Your future is riding on the current campaign for governor.
Now is the time to act. Because of the debate over the nearly ready Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, what you do - or don't do - now will influence the rest of your life.
Pick the candidate who will bdst ensure your future,i support him and, if you are old enough to vote, vote for him.
Starting Sunday, Oct.19,' pro-Seabrook Gov. John Sununu and anti-Seabrook challenger Paul McEachern will meet for l
the first of four encounters before the Nov. 4 election.
Be there this Sunday or at one of the three following sessions, listen to both sides, then make up your own minds.
It's your future. Take part in shaping it.
The first session will be a candidates' forum this Sunday at Temple of Adath Yesurn in Manchester. The forum will begin at 10 a.m., with the gubernatorial candidates expected i
to speak at about noon.
t The next two ses'slons also will be candidates' fort.ms. On
!I Wednesday, Oct. 22, at Cardinal's Seafood & Steakhouse in Rochester, that city's Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring the
- /4 forum. On Thursday, Oct. 23, at the Highway Hotel in
(
i I
0 t
IT'S YOUR FUTURE..
g Concord, the Chamber in Concord is being joined by Business and Industry of New Hampshire as sponsor. Both sessions begin at 7:30 a.m.
The major meeting between the gubernatorial candidates will be a televised debate at 8 p.m., Thursday, Oct. 30, in The Center of New Hampshire, the Manchester convention hall.
It is being sponsored by WMUR-TV in Manchester.
Stephen Comley, a leader in the antinuclear movement, has announced his support of McEachern for governor. He has asked New Hampshire students to act now to protect their future by joining in the campaign to elect McEachern and to turn Gov. Sununu out of office. Says Comley:
" Paul McEachern is an experienced public servant who wil!
stop Seabrook.
" John Sununu is a former paid consultant to the nuclear power industry whose reelection campaign is being financed by that industry.
"During his tenure as governor, his. office has been informed of all the problems in the construction of Seabrook i
and the potential problems with its operation. Either Gov.
i Sununu has ignored these problems under instructions from t
the nuclear power industry or he doesn't understand the
^
danger of catastrophe which could result.
"In either case, Gov. Sununu is unfit to serve."
[
l c
l l
I 1
l
e 9
IT'S YOUR FUTURE-1 McEachern has centered his campaign on stopping Seabrook, pointing out that now is the last chance before "the I
disaster called Seabrook wrecks our economy and forces us to live with the threat of evacuating our homes."
Comley, in supporting McEachern, states:
"New Hampshire doesn't need Seabrook" - alternative forms of electrical power are available.
"New Hampshire doesn't want Seabrook" - electric rates will double initially, then triple in 7 to 8 years, quadruple in 10 to 12 years.
"New Hampshire can stop Seabrook now." - a vote for McEachern will kill this $4.6 billion fiasco.
" Remember, participatory democracy only works when responsible citizens participate. Don't let the nuclear I
industry sell you short. Show it that you care about your future."
e I
l I
l
/c t
i
ade % bedrat&cAfay0%
~
o cha. 2+. 84. c/4aao&m am i
n ai, 1
$&/ S48-2552 N}.
S48-7440
. L =aw oc+nbr 15,1986 Gu w.w r John Sununu Office of the Governor Concord, New Hangshire 03301
Dear Governor Sununu:
I am a resident of Powley, Massachusetts which is just outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius.
I am also the owner / administrator of the above nursing home. We, in Rowley, have an added interest in the plant as our children go back into the 10 mile radius to attend school and residents of our nursing home as mil as this town go back into the 10 mile radius to go to the hospital.
I have been very actively involved in gathering information relating to the Seabrook plant for the past several conths. As elected protector of the citizens of the State of New Harnshire, I rescectfully request your written responses to the following questions:
1.
Wnen I sent you a letter regarding the issue of sheltered individuals not being evacuated in the event of a nuclear accident, why did you send me a form letter instead of addressing the issue?
2.
Khy did you not ask for the imediate stcenage of all Seabrook progress, given the recent accident at Chernobyl?
3.
Given the ramifications of the recent accident at Chernobyl, how can you reccmend that we stay within a 10-mile radius and still feel that the safety of the people of New Haneshire and Massachusetts is being raintained?
4.
Enclosed you will find a docunent which I received from the thited States Justice department involving James Padovano. He was found guilty of falsifying welding records at Seabrook. If you were aware of this, why didn't you rake it cublic?
5.
Enclosed is a copy of an interview I had with James Asselstine, NRC Camu.ssioner, on August 15th, which has been circulated throuch the media. Don't you think it is your responsibility as Governor
__to. seek out why he feels this way? Don't/you feel his omments should be fully investigated?
O w
~
I t
~~
ID
~s t
s b,
6.
Do you feel the starmar beach pr=1=ticm l$ns been fully taken I
into ocnsideration?
my did you.not take Ms. Fallon's widely pnh14e4=4 population survey into serious cxmsideration rather than refusing to have it change your opinions?
7.
Enclosed you will find a cocy of an off4cial recuest to Corpressman Dingle to anh'ar'na eighteen former and present erroloyees of the NRC. Because of the obvious disaplaits within the NBC office and because of their authority, don't you agree that we should put off licensing Seabrook until after the hearing I have asked for?
Enclosed you will find a copy of an article frca the Patriot Iedger of October 3rd regarding the Canadian hydro-electric project. It seems to me that this would be a safe alternative to nuclear power until we have fully investigated.
8.
Given all the evidence we have seen, given all the evidence I have gathered while in Washington, D. C., and given Gernobyl, don't you think it is in the best interest of the people of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and other states to not contaminate the Seabrook plant until the NRC is fully investigated?
9.
If not for our health and safety, but for our kids and their kids -
don't you feel it is your responsibility to fully investigate Seabrook before making a mistake? Would you not aaree that it
^
seems only fair that we do this for our children?
I understand that you have done a lot for New Hampshire. I also believe that you are an honest man, but I have to tell you that, with all rescect, you are dead wrong in your stand on Seabrook based on the infon ation aiven to me and on the information that will be given by people in the NBC at the uncoming hearing.
Sincerely,
}
hki.'% 0. (nr Stephen B. Cculey SBC/mk P
(t O.
t Yo g.
t-
/E pg.g.
i
h STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
..g*
A'9 -
3 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR e
/, yA _.
ies lb 4---
CONComo 03301 e
p \\- 's f %f,<
JOHN H. SUNUNU GOVERNOR August 8, 1986 Mr. Stephen B.
Comley Administrator Sea View Convalescent & Nursing Home Mansion Drive Rowley, MA 01969
Dear Concerned Citizen:
Thank you for your recent letter registering your concern about the Seabrook nuclear power station.
Governor John Sununu has asked me to respond to you on his behalf.
It is not within the power of the Governor to halt construction of the plant by gubernatorial fiat.
It must be remembered, this facility is a stockholder-owned entity whose rates are subject to approval by the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission.
Seabrook is not e
owned by the State of New Hampshire.
e Governor Sununu favors the speedy completion of Seabrook because New Hampshire and New England will require the energy produced in order to maintain the quality of life we now enjoy.
Public Service Company of New Hampshire has complied with the laws and regulations which govern construction of such a
facility and government agencies and regulators must also obey these laws.
As you may be aware, the nearly complete Seabrook nuclear po we r plant recently received high grades in a review of its operational capabilities from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Categories included in the 15-month Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance by the seven-member NRC panel were construction, pre-operational testing involving such areas as the hot functional test, fire protection and housekeeping, operational readiness, assurance of g
quality and licensing process for construction and operators.
O l
t 1
.s 4
I
+
}
(
i
1 Mr. Stephen B.
Conley Page'2 P
August 8, 1986 Before Seabrook'will be allowed to generate energy
,i t must first pass.all required safety standards.
Quality checks have been required through all* stages of construction.
Through the end of the century there will be pressure on the energy situation worldwide.
We must take this time to develop all alternative sources hydro, solar, wood, biomass, coal and yes, nuclear.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with this office.
Please feel free to do so at 3
any time.
Sincerely,
\\
JJ
--n John W. Ci[d Assistant to the Governor JWG/jik o
t 9
L O
e e
O If
- i
, g
- 5
< =,,
I
.4
- 1-Or immealate relt::atsts.m 1
0-
.i press contact:
Stephen Comfey The Sheraton Grand (202) 528-2100-PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (Oct. 3) - The credibility of New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is being challenged this evening by,
antinuclear activist Stephen Comley.
In testimony prepared for an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) hearing here, Comley charges Sununu has information that could cause the nearly ready Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant not to be licensed. Sununu is'seen not releasing this information about defects in the plants because he is in the midst of a reelection campaign in which he needs nuclear power industry support.
Comley also charges conflicts of interest and other problems within the NRC, disqualifying that federal agency from fairly discharging its duties as regulator of the nuclear power industry.
The hearings, which began Monday, are to consider a request by Public' Service Co. of N.H. for a low-power _. - _
t6 sting license for Seabrook. The ASLB is reviewing its 1983 _,
ruling questioning whether safety equipment inside Seabrook's containment dome could withstand the effects tof a I
-l-S l
1-Or ifT1rileQia.Te k elei:16da nuclear accident and whether the plant's control room is
' safely organized.
Seabrook, after $4.6 billion and 14 years spent on planning and construction, is about complete. However, before it can be brought on-stream, preliminary permits needed are:
- a zero-power license to load fuel into the reactor and conduct tests of electrical equipment but not to start a nuclear chain reaction,
- a low-power license to test its reactor at low' power.
Comley strongly opposes either license, charging that once the reactor is "dirtled" with nuclear fuel, closing down the reactor and converting the plant to safer coal or natural gas would be much more difficult.
On Sept. 20, Mass. Gov. Michael Dukakis announced his opposition to the planned opening this fall of the controversial nuclear plant near Massachusetts' northeast border, charging:
~
"If a serious accident occurs at Seabrook, as I am told i
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to assume that it will, (there "Is) a foreseeable likelihood of high dosages of radioactive intake, against which emergency planning and evacution cannot adequately protect."
Dukakis reached his decision after, among other l
~2-i 3
l
For immediate release.
o L
j considerations, a visit from Comley, who explained to the governor that evacuation plans in case of an accident at Seabrook do not include those in hospitals or nursing homes who cannot easily be moved. "Those too infirm to be moved, who w'ould have to be left behind in case of a nuclear catastrophe, most likely would be our children, our parents and our grandparents," says Comley.
Comley operates a nursing home in Rowley, Mass.,12 miles from Seabrook. He has notified area hospitals, the Mass. Federation of Nursing Homes, the Mass. Department of Elder Affairs and other state agencies of this omission in e' acution plans. An NRC commission'er acknowledges this is a v
serious omission which has not been addressed in evacuation i
plans in case of an accident at any nuclear plant in America.
Since the accident last spring at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Soviet Union, Comley has been campaigning against the opening of Seabrook. During lobbying trips to Washington over the last two months, Comley contends he has-learned of problems with nuclear power, leading him to the conclusion that Seabrook should not be opened and all other U.S. nu$ lear power plants should be closed.
(
Comley charges that the NRC, rather than acting as the
,u.
regulator of the nuclear power industry and disclosing
- f.
serious problems, has acted as the industry facilitator, m
M y
I i
For immediate. release; e
, sweeping such problems from publi that N.H. Gov. Sununu h c view. Comley asserts as participated in this "The nuclear power industry has cover-up.
using to wheel around the NRC and a wheelbarrow that it's who will serve the Industryother government officials safety," Comley says.
at the expense of the publi '
cs Separately, the NRC also this w eek at a hearing by a subcame under fire in Washin and Comm gton committee i
erce Committee. The subc of the House Energy Dingell (D-Mich.), charg dommittee breakdown" in investig i the NRC with a "r chairman, Re e
egulatory nuclear program.
at ng the Tennessee Valle y Authority's Dingell's office has Comley to allow him to t received a formal retjues t from
" NRC. Comley says h estify on the problems 18 e will submit within the present and former NRCto Dinge!!'s
' be subpoenaed to employees ctaff a list of respond to his who Comley says charges.
should (end) h*s 4
umumee mm e
f
For-immediate.releasem
?
e
, sweeping such problems from public view. Comley asserts that N.H. Gov. Sununu has participated in this cover-up.
"The nuclear power industry has a wheelbarrow that it's using to wheel around the NRC and other government officials
)
who will serve the industry at the expense of the 'public's safety," Comley says.
Separately, the NRC a'so came under fire in Washington this week at a hearing by a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The subcommittee chairman, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), charged the NRC with a " regulatory breakdown" in investigating the Tennessee Valley Authority's nuclear program.
Dingell's office has received a formal reciuest from Comley to allow him to testify en the problems within the
' NRC. Comley says he will submit to Dingell's staff a list of 18 present and former NRC employees who Comley says should
' be subpoenaed to respond to his charges.
(en d)
E em he
\\
~
t
's C) 0/
..,.....,3 6d sr.etTrassuaabuts: =
Tr nationaldigast l
g Indictment names co.
19' nuclear plant roi" One of the nation's largest far,
utilities was indicted M(
Wednesday on charges of a
operating a Michigan nuclear g3 power plant in violation of federal fire regulations and as lying about it to the Nuclear Ct $
/
Regulatory Commission (NRC).
brr,.
A federal grand jury in Grand Mi. s Rapids indicted two anc' subsidiaries of American fibe Electric Power Co., which
~
owns eight utilities in seven wee "
a $1".
states, for its operation of the 20 n ' -
Donald C. Cook nuclear plant deliv ""
in Bridgman, Mich. Also lovei,,s,k charged in the nine-count findini h indictment was Jude G. Del basicit.,
Percio of Sayville, N.Y., who said B had been senior nuclear public engineer for the New Minner York-based company. John A.
Mills.
Smistanka, U.S. attorney in will b.
Grand Rapids, said and i.
Wednesday that this is the first cereth.
case in which criminal charges er --
have been brought against a nuclear plant'for violating J
safety regulations.
Dighsservingtime '
on driving count * '
< 6.J t
i 1
(3
\\l.
Powley, Mass. 01969 Noverrber ~ 3, 1986 VIA REGISTERED MAIL Jerry Harbour, Ph.D.
Administrative Judge Atanic Safety & Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Camission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Judge Harbour:
Enclosed please find a copy of the James. V. Padovano case which relates to the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant. His sole position was to inspect welds ati this plant. He was charged with 11 counts of Faderal violations from 7-30-82 to 3-15-83 and pleaded guilty and was sentenced 9-30-85.
This case was never fully investigated and nine counts were dismissed with prejudice.
'Ihere were also other people who should have testified, co-workers of Mr. Padovano, but they were never asked. I think the least the Department of Justice could have done was to fully investigate the case and let all witnesses be questioned. I feel the case should be re-opened in Washington through the Justice Department.
Please read the enclosed letter I have given "Ib The People of New Hanpshire '. I have had more than 30,000 copies printed and more coming.
As you know, I have worked hard in trying to provide the public with the real story of the NRC. I have to be totally carmtitted, forgetting about myself, to getting this accomplished and I can assure you that I am.
I would like to hear fran you at your earliest convenience.'
. Sincerely, h
N l' (
s S'tephen B. Camley
[
SBC/mk P. S.:
I have also enclosed an entire over-view of what I have been doing these last several nonths.
Q.--
Q g
1:
k
YQYV bG b0, /Wb vin mISem mII.
Senator Alan Singson, Chaiman Subcm mittee on Nuclear Regulation 262 SDOB (R-WY)
Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator Singson:
I am a resident of Pa ley, Massachusetts which is just outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius. I am also the owner / administrator of the Sea View Nursing Hme. We, in Bowley, have an mMM interest in the plant as our children go back into the 10 mile radius to attend schcol and residents of our nursing home as well as this town go cack into the 10 mile radius tt.; go to the hospital. I have been very actively involved in gathering information relating to the Seabrook plant for the past several months.
Enclosed please find fourteen cuestions that I would like very much to have you answer, given the position that you hold. I think it is only richt that the American people know your responses to these questions.
I respectfully request that you send me your written respnses at your earliest convenience.
Shank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, h AU
,l tephen B. Cmley
- SBC/mk Washington Iocation:
Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 Massachusetts Iccation:
Sea View Nursing ikxte (617) 948-2552 i
'l. -.
O o
k nU vra ersme er.
6lr 30,19N.
Senator Peter Dmenici Comnittee on Nuclear Regulation D1rksen Senate Office Biilding Roca 434 Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator D eenici:
I am'a resident of Bowley, Massachusetts which is just outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius. I am also the owner /adninistrator of the Sea View Nursing McIne. We, in Pbwley, have an added interest in the plant as our children go back into the 10 mile radius to attend school and residents of our nursing hme as well as this town go back into the 10 mile radius to go to the hospital. I have been very actively involved in gathering information relating to the Seabrook Plant for the past several months.
Enclosed please find fourteen questions that I would like very much to have you answer, given the position that you hold. I think it is only right that the American people know your responses to these questions.
I respectfully request that you send me your written resconses at your earliest convenience.
'Ihank you for your cooperation.
Sincyrely,
^ 'LV
~
S hen B. Ccaley
[
ISBC/mk Washington Iccation:
Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 Massachusetts Im.ation:
Sea View Nursing H ee (617) 948-2552 t
O_
g a
i f
4 &b 0, l9 f'
/g tg g Senator Steven Syres g
91be=nittee on Nuclear Regulation 509 Hart Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator Syrrms:
I am a resident of'. Ibwley, Massachusetts which is just outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius. I am also the owner / administrator of the Sea View Nursing Hcme. We, itt Bowley, have an added interest in the plant as our children go back into the 10 mile radius to attend school and residents of our nursing home as well as this town go back into the 10 mile radius to go to the hospital. I have been very actively involved in gathering information relating to the Seabrook plant for the past several trenths.
Enclosed please find fourteen questions that I would like very much to have you answer, given the position that you hold.
I think it is only right that the American people know your responses to these questions.
I respectfully request that you send me your written responses at your earliest convenience.
'Ihank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, I'
/)
D"-
NMA fhenB.Ccmley Step SBC/rk Washingten Iccation:
Sheraton Grand (202) 628-210,0 Massachusetts Iccation:
Sea View Nursing Hcme (617) 948-2552 s
l Q:
l l
CD
?
I i'
?~
2 of 3 i
1.
Do.you feel that the citizens of Ibwley should have a voice in evacuation planning as it pertains to the Seabrook Dower Plant even though we live 2 miles outside the 10 mile radius but when our kids go to school they go to school within the 10 mile radius?
i Don't you think we should have scme say in the evacuation process?
2.
Do you feel that some means simuld be provided for people who cannot -
be moved, other than merely being sheltered in place? 'Ihis includes a child who is one year old wlo is just operated on in the hospital and because it is too dangerous to move him he would be part of this category.
3.
11egarding the location of the Seabrook Power Plant: it has been doctanented by many influential people that the stamer beach population has not been taken into consideration. Would you please look into this situation and otmnent.
4.
Given the chernobyl incident in Russia, what is your opinion of reducing the radius from 10 miles to 2 miles considering that the Russian accident affected the. cows mile in Vermont.
5.
I understand that the low level licensing requirements have been reduced as they pertain to issues of evacuation problems that may arise in a city or town. This change has enabled questions 1
not to be resolved before a license is issued. Given the Chernobyl incident and the prob 1ms and questions that surround the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plynouth, which has been branded "the worst-run plant in the U.
S.", do you think we should reverse again and require that evacuation issues be resolved before a low-level license is granted to any new plants?
6.
Do you agree with Mr. Asselstine who, as you know, I met with on August 15th and said that the NRC has been more a protector of the industry than they have of the people.
If you do agree with him fine, if you do not, explain why.
+
7.
Ilas Chernobyl changed your thinking regarding nuclear power?
8.
Do you feel that tle people are really informed about and know of the dangers of nuclear power?
9.
Because of the potential safety probims as well as the astronomical cost of building nuclear power plants, don't you feel nuclear power is becoming obsolete?
l 10.
Regarding future generations, would you recomiend that we continue to build nuclear power plants?
11.
Do you feel that the public would be justified in believing that the N11C is not acting in the public's best interest? Mr. Asselstine has already said that he believes the public is justified in believing this and this is my inpression as well.
I would like to know yours and why._
12.
What are the differences between the Russian plants and our nuclear f
plants as you see th m?
[h 13.
Where our government is the so-called enployee and the American citizen the mployer, don't you feel it is only fair and productive to let the f
v *.
O 14.
Regarding the James Padovano case. He was an inspector at the Seabrook Nuclear Plant and was found guilty of falsifying records en the welds. I was rather alarmed that the Justice Department allowed this case to be plea-bargained. I feel that more evidence would have been brought out is this case were fully investigated.
Would like to know how you feel about this and why?
+
,P-9 9
9 e
1
. O q
\\
gr m
C(r c
I
J
}
October 3, 1986 VIA REGISTERED MAIL Congressman. John D.
Dingell subcommittee on oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce 2323 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 4
)
Dear Congressman Dingall:
I am officially. and respectfully requesting the opportunity to testify on the problems within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In addition, I am requesting that you arrange for a hearing to subpeona eighteen former and present employees of the NRC that I can recommend to investigate the suppression of information that is' being withheld.to protect the nuclear industry.
These issues and concerns are extremely important to the American people.
I have met formally with'Mr. Asselstine of the NRC who concurs that our nuclear plants are not safe.
Hopefully, we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans to die before people start taking these concerns seriously.
I met yesterday with Peter Stockton of your office and am expecting him to call me the first of next week.- After he has reviewed the material that I lef t with him and when he informs me that he is interested in discussing this further, I will disclose the list of people in the NRC whom I recommend be subpeoned.
As Mr. Stockton knows, I have written to other Congressmen and Senators who should be interested in this issue, but so far it hhs fallen on deaf ears.
I have been told that your office is the best around.
Hopefully, we can work together on this.
I can appreciate the fact that everybody in Washington is extremely busy, but I submit that there is nothing more important than this and it is about time some-body did something.
I am asking for your immediate attention and assistance in this serious matter.
Sincerely, Stephen B. Comley l()
/
l Was ngton Location:
Sheraton Grand - (202) 628-2100 3(617) 948-2553 l
Rowley, Mass.
l
- p-i f-
34..s:. i.:
u e..
....:., a G..;.. :.a.. :.:..
.,. :, ;,z..
.8
]
-r -..==n un e$m s u
i K*l *lr.*:Y' M Ya,"Z*
C'.Y.~'.".lTil...
.7:
'.*lf, r 11.5. T10H3C Of RtprC3CntatIDt3 O'
l s.gp= ss.s
. m-e.
er er 5
l
~ " Q, _
Ecm=mr on F.mrgg d Commmt
. ~. - -
YDuhington, BC 2m i
OPENING STATEMENT I
i OF i
l THE HCNORABLE JOHN D. DING ELL CHAIRMAN 5
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
]
1 4
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1,1986 At today's hearing -- the Subcommittee's third on the collapse of the Tennessee Valley Authority's nuclear program --
j we will focus on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's apparent continuing inability to cope with an unprecedented regulatory br ea kdu.in.
The Commission's actions to date demonstrate that the 4
NRC has yet to deal with the situation it' helped create.
This fiasco did not come to light as a result of the normal workings of the regulatory process. We know as much as we do only because several TVA engineers were willing to risk their
.x 33 careers in order to carry the truth to the Congress and tc NRC g h;c " '
e 4
~
Headquarters officials, sadtv eneonh. we nnda-eeand thae
- u a a* 1 these engineers are beino harassed by WA ma na cemene.
a= w el i >=
1 gan one else in TVA who raises a cr i ti ca l enaerinn ihnn* w i r =1
'd
-~
White and the nuclear erocram.
~
The Subcommittee recently obtained an extraordinary document that revealtd that the new management group at WA determined bef ore they took over that they would have to root,out "tw o two ca nce r sh caneers' in the TVA organization. Unbel iev ab1v. the
=
l were our witnerseg ce ew enhen,m4**..'.
i mee h =rinn in wn. --
the NSRS engineers 4 nd OTC. a consultino firm co n du ct i na thy empicyee conce n program at watts sar.
j Admiral White, when he took over the WA nuclear program, eliminated these two groups and harassed a number of the engineers in the NSRS orgar:is,ation -- all because they knew too I
auch. The NRC did nothing.
l Tinding the reasons f or the curre.t state of aff airs, how ev er, is our long-term goal -- I hope we live that long.
Our
+
purpose today is to discuss the determine the status of the TVA' progress in the NRC's ef f ort to s nuclear program and how it meets the Cc.imission's requirements. We are not pleased with what appears to be a continuing tolerance f or lax regulatory perf ormance by WA's managers. Commissioner Asselstine is mese l
persuasive when he says that "...the NRC is not adequately
)
acentuying ano pur suing the sar ety pr obl em 1 i n TV A's nucl ea r I
prearam."
1 Some of the Subcommittee's specific concerns include s,
)
1 l
MMASSENT -- The eviderice indicates that WA continu' s to e
discriminate against employees who take seriously the need f or strict adherence to regulatory r eq ui rement s.
Ha ra s sm ent exists _
l
[
because the Commission tolerates it.
l l
_. w tR _-
Y# + b %' 9-j.
f,
~.'. R. f.. sa.;;
a M-..
.... L ' " ' '. e -
-a
' "E*U* * * ~~ ^
1 1
t 6
INVESTICATIONS -- The NRC's-progress in investiga ting potentially criminal violations of the Commission's regulations
,m r -,
,1=ence ir rne warKina l ev el but a serious lack of timely completion of those i nv e st ica tion s.
The staf f and the 5
C^-m i =
- i n n
- ^ ha arraar D' " a ' Y ' a i _ They currently have adequa te
_...<a nr.
- n
- v. &u n F in44 nne nF materi al f al ea statemenen hv TVA i
_on the Februa ry 20, 1985 'certif ica tion of. Watts Bar. and the j
__Aneandi r R certification of March 1986.
We cannot wait f or two years f or decisions on these cases i
whli e the co-m i s si on continues to acceot certif ied sta tements i
m F - mm "n
nF F 4 e4 a1 = u hn have l ied to them in the pa st.
In recent years, the Commission rej ected a finding by the Of fice of Investfeattens i n t h e D.
C. Cook case involvino criminal material i
j frise statements to the NRC.
- Later, D.
C. Cook was indicted by the Department of Justice f or making criminal material f alse statements to the NRC.
Th a eignal cane hy tha cem'i = =i nn in ench ca se s is that thev vant to avoid findinos of criminal violations on eh. pa re nr l icensees.
This is unacceptable.
TVA'S NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT -- While TVA's management disarray in nne the di rect pr ov ince of the Mnc. the Commission contributes to the chaos by allowino TVA nuclear manacement -- both Admiral.
3 whi*a
)3 ggps ', "'"/
and the TVA Board -- to assume that the NRC would continue its past practice of interpreting its regulatory requirements retroactively to fit the TVA realities.
8' As I pointed out at our first hearing in February 1986, TVA was constant 1y' reorganized to placate the NRC, the Congress, and the public -- but the rascality continued unabated. Under the
,, ',. 7. 4 Steve White regime, we have been asked to give him time -- he has 27' 9j been given time -- almost a year into his two year commitment.
His tqack record appears to be a rerun of the same old movie.
4 His statement on Appendix B, wel ds, and harassment and intimidation appear to be f alse, misleading, or disingenuous.
The Commission has been exercising its role on TVA matters through a group of f our of ficials, who collectively are called the Senior Management Team.
Our witnesses today are the members of th&t team, plus Mr. Hugh Thompson, who was responsible for day-to-day management.
9 Poey *b.'W, t
I i
i t
5 e
I I:.
i l
.., :...__1_._
k, i
./
Cottgregg of ffjc Ettiteb fatated dc I
l houffe o! Repre.4entatibes i
tr C
Ea5hington,33.C. 20515 l(h gA(E September 30, 1986
\\p v
t(.Y G. }'
The Honorable Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
Chairman United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
As you know, there has been considerable controversy concerning the conduct of Ms. Sharon~Connelly, the Director of the Office of Inspector and Auditor (OIA) at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) relating to the Equal Opportunity Office (EEO) complaint filed by Lisa Shea, an employee at NRC.
After reviewing NRC documents on this matter, we have concluded that, at,the very minimum, Sharon Connell'y should be removed from her position as the Director of OIA.-
We fail to understand why the Commission decided to reinstate Ms.
Connelly after both the NRC General Counsel's office and the Department of Justice (DOJ) concluded that Ms. Connelly's conduct was improper.
As you know, the January 14, 1986 memorandum to the Commissioners on this matter written by James A.
Fitzgerald, NRC's Assistant General Counsel, states:
"Weyconclude, from the available..information.4that.:p(,1 )
b the~pVip~o^n' dei,aY66 difVfh'e%'eVi'dWiiI681*i'n'dfcVt" emf 6a,tWMs.
a'A Co nn e l ly ;*in w o b t aining eM svy S he a sh s e ctf rity2fi'1'e'sf d
through her agent-George-Mulley? and-'in ob' tai'n'ing Ms.
Shea's~ personnel-files,-violated-the-PrivacyJAvi.
becauseWsheadign,ogavep{apneegogrMspSygfjf,igsgn th'e" performance of her' duties, and (2') the
~
prepond nce the evidence ind1 cates tha Mr.,(Mdlle) vi'ol'a't lie @goPr" vaCy$A*dtyb~y~ir6q~0V8t'i~ rig 1Yd' 3
' ~ ~ ~
thst'he"d'id sb as E st'a'ndard-invesc/gati9e ff1'e's?
^
f t"echnig'ue to camouflage"hls'^/inte' rest *i'n"Ms'MSh'da'. ""
w.
a ThelMarch 22, 1986 letter,to the'NRC from~Lawretice1 Lip M Chidf of. dene'ra1.Litigat' ion and"Leija1 EdviEeiSeEt'ioF6fhth'dutRf '^^
^
i
""*"*"*~ ' " " " " " * " * ~ ~ '
" ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' " " " ' " ' * " ~ * ~ " * ~ " * ' " " ' ' " * * ~ ' ' ' "
Cs) conclusions-and-raises + many other" questions rabout' MsrConne Lly 's condlicT. 'The DOJ letter calls-into-question-the<trnihfulnessof
~
^
Ma.OConne11y's account of her actions in this case.
It states:
i i
p
2 (O
"Ms.
Connelly's claimed motivation for requesting Ms.
Shea'c files, i.e., to determine whether Ms. Shea was entitled to a promotion and how she could help Ms.
Shea, does not make sense in view of the facts."
DOJ also indicates Ms. Connelly might have fabricated written t
notes to cover-up improper actions.
The DOJ letter states:
"We believe these facts give rise to a strong inference l
that these self-serving notes, omitting any reference to the filing of an EEO complaint, were concocted by 4
Ms. Connelly at the time of the September 9 conversa-tion, or more likely thereafter in the face of an investigation."
The< Director of the. Office o'f the Inspector ands Auditor-s7the h'igheat"l'evef^NRCf af' fi'c'ia1Th'aVihg#di're'c'ti' ret]li5nsitif r~
malintaining - the.- agency.'siethical' stah'd'a'rdh'.""A's~su"c Directcr must-be.an-in'dividual-whose-onn'-5thical conduct is beyond proach.
Unfortunately the evidence indicates that Ms.
Connelly does not meet this standard. gOfficialninvestigations have.. concluded thatcshe.may have commiIth'd"a?dYim'i"6's1*'h'cy2fiEr
- and, ev'sn 1f further "inqU1'ri'd'sidfdTriotYd6m'6rfs' twt'dYdi'imfh'(1'i'th behavior **is c1early*' belowthe? minimum *.7a~c'dsptab1'eM' eve'13." ", " ~
-a w,J _....
. _ Ap.h :
Ms. Conne11y's moral compass is erratic' at host. In light of what
,has. transpired, she cannot be relied upon tc be the principal enforcer of the agency's ethics.
Moreover, the Commission's own actions 'in this" mattere transniit the-wrong message,to4NRC~ employees.
The NRCaisCan(agdncygiwhic'h, i*
of ten called upon to make hard choicesaunderfdiffichft*^~~"geI(^
at_b'ottomi must rely ^on~ the integrityrof-its. employee's$who
~
circumstances.
Too of ten the easier path' 'is"th~aV"o'f'~oberlooking
~
or downplaying regulatory violations.
When the Commission shows itself taking the easy rather than the correct path, the i
inevitable consequence will be an uverall degradation in the agency's ability to do its part in assuring the highest level of safety in the nuclear industry.
The record cleads. usato the unfortunate] coni::lusihtNitfdif5Ms.
o Connelly is not' fit to carry.'out,her. duties as,,Directoraofgthe Office of. Inspector 3and,, Audit:or,.
Un d e rT'o r'di'n'a ry."61'r^c'dWis fa n c'EW w e
^
s
~
think it unwise for7Me' tie'rsiof, Congress'Tro ;reco~mI5e'n'dgp;ersch.he1 m
O G
G I.
f k
.,3 changes within a encies..But.,this is no ordinary. circumstance.
.c Our re s
1 Tiiji'sl,ilhWe.g We urge th'at Ms., Connelly-beative ov O
Kn'it our
'5h removed' 1'mm6diately from her position;as. Director:f ofithe.iOf.fice..
of', Inspector.,..and. Auditor.
,.9
+
Sincerely, J.
(*
~
s.
SAM GEgENSON MORRIS K.
UDALL f4 f&
d
's e
f e
0 0
J t
/s
A k!
J Ibwley, Mass. 01969 October 30, 1986 VIA REGISTERED MAIL Mr. Iawrence Lippe Chief of General Litagation U. S. Departnent of Justice Washington, D. C. 20000
Dear Mr. Lippe:
I am a resident of Ibwley, Massachusetts which is just outside the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's 10 mile radius.
I am also the owner / administrator of the Sea View Nursing Ecme. We, in Rowley, have an added interest in the plant as our children go back into the 10 mile radius to attend school and residents of our nursing hczne as well.as this town go b'ack into the 10 mile radius to go to the hospital.
1 have been very actively involved in gathering infonnation relating to the Seabrook plant for the cast several nonths.
I understand you initiated a letter to Nunzio J. Palladino regarding proceedings against Ms. Sharon Connolly of the NRC. I would like to obtain a copy of the original letter.
I_ understand that as of Fridav, October 17, 1986, the Decartment of Justice reluctantlv decided not to crosee,ite Mrs. Connollv.
Whv. in vour estimation, were those croceedinos drooned? p g g - pg'r UA C
Also, I have enclosed a copy of the James Padovano case,regarding falsifying records reading the inspection of welds at the Seabrook plant. 8N Who would I get in touch with to open this case? I feel it should be re-opened as there are people who should have testified but were not asked to.
I am in the process of investigating the NRC as I have good evidence that the NRC is representing the nuclear industry, but more importantly, are shirking their responsibilities to the American pecole regardirg safety.
Sincerely,
,d, Le n l$
!l s u hy Stephen B. Ccxnley
]
SBC/mk P. S.: Enclosed is a history of my efforts, r
r I
M
,f
~
September 8, 1986 Commissioner Zech United States Nuclear Resource Council 1717 H Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Commissioner Zech:
Do you have reason to believe or would y6u know of any wrong-
'doing as it relates to investigative material that was brought to your attention that was later disc 6uraged to be looked into further because it may pose a threat to the nuclear industry?
Sincerely, Stephen comley Rowley, Massachusetts I
i 9
4
September 8, 1986 Nunzio'J. Palladino, Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Do you have reason to believe or would you know of any wrong-doing as it relates to investigative material that was brought to your attention that was later discouraged to be looked into further because it may pose a threat to the nuclear industry?
Sincerely, Stephen Comley Rowley, Massachusetts o
e e
O
\\l' l
M 4
UNITED STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
h WASHINGTON. D.C. 205S3 (Q) "$4 *=invf J
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY September 26, 1986 Mr. Stephen B. Comley Mansion Drive Rowley, MA 01969
Dear Mr. Comley:
It has recently come to my attention that in addition to the-letter you wrote to Chairman Lando W. Zech on September 8, 1986 concerning investigatory material, you wrote an identical letter to Mr. Nunzio J. Palladino at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Th,is is to inform you that former:ChairmaniPal,ladirioLis'W61 1ongei a member o'f th? Nucle'aP Rbis1ato'fyfC8iiimf5's^iT6 inlEf}iat-- no
~
~
re p l y to ' t h a t-l e t.t e rf wi l l': b'e?.foi-t hif6ig n g.~ ' " " * *"" ' *""" ' ""
Sincerely,
/-
~
Thomas R. Combs, Chief Correspondence and Records Branch l
9 e av w
O L
m.,
/0 N
Wb bnJ5W $/vitt, hfM$,
bM$UJ2VJ0496.9
- 1..
f
'W
$ W S48-2552
' --ltlEy;g 348-7440 SW :-=mL
~
October 13, 1986
)
l Mr. Combs Nuclear Regulatory Catmission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Combs:
I realize that Mr. Paladine is no lonaer with the NRC. However, I had contacted the NRC earlier and asked them to forward ny letter to Mr. Daladum. Even though he is a private citizen, given the responsibility he had, I would be very interested in his responses.
Please either give me Mr. Paladino's new address or ' forward I:v letter to him. I wuld like to hear from you, either way, in writina. Thank you.
Sincerely, 7
Stephen B. Comley SBC/rk e
\\
[
I h
MrH^
GRIMaeJUvZ3vt&5
]
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
r:ASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 s%++.../,-
q n
t s#
~ October 27, 1986 Mr. Stephen B.
Coomley Sea View Convalescent & Nursing Home e-Mansion Drive Rowley, MA 01969
Dear Mr. Coomley:
It is my understanding that you may contact Dr. Palladino at the following address:
Dr. Nun =i o J.
Palladino Professor Emeritus Pennsylvania State University Department of Nuclear Engineering State Coll ege, Pennsylvania 16802 Sincerely, I
Thomas R.
Combs, Chief Correspondence & Records Branch Og
\\
7
\\
OI V
dB-Y
3Rtty
[g UNITED STATES v
[
n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- u,5-g-\\..... f 6
OCT 1 1986
~
Mr. Stephen B. Comley, Administrator Sea View Nursing Home'
"~
Mansion Drive Rowley, Massachusetts 01969
Dear Mr. Comley:
Chairman Zech has asked me to respond to your letter to him of August 22, 1986.
The questions in your letter focused upon several issues including emergency planning at the Seabrook nuclear generating station, the Russian nuclear accident at Chernoby1 and nuclear power in general.
Enclosed are answers to each of the questions contained in.your letter.
If we can be of further assistance, please let me know.
Sincerely,
/,
../
).
, at4' Vi'ctor Stello, Qr./
Executive Direct 6r for Operations
Enclosure:
Questions and Responses W
WWf psauu %
A wnkt f.atea ><aAsek
- m e en 6
O)
C i
j i
b
M
/#
- N Nlh N0 fA8 g..'.
f
- brie, htwt$. YMok/Jddfl 0X969 f
m MM Q~n BW S48-2ssa
- ssa
- :;;x ybh23 S48-7440
~-
October 13, 1986 Mr..Stello Nuclear Regulatory Camtission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Mr. Stello:
'Ihank you for your response to my questions. Powever, I did recuest that Mr. Zech answer my questions, representing his own views as a Contrissioner of the Nuclear Reculatory Coninission.
I feel the public has the right to know how each Comissioner feels on an individual basis, and Mr. Asselstine was cuite accoredating. I do not feel that this is an unreasonable recuest due to the ramifications of the decisions that your agency makes as it reflect on the safety of the American people.
Please forward this recuest to Mr. Zech and rhind each Comnissioner that I await tnelr individual ooinions.
Sincerely, fl I
Stechen B. Cbmley i
SBC/ Irk G
e
- 4 g
t I
(N)
O, l7A O
O
.?
NRC RESPONSES _
Question 1 e
Do you feel that the people of Rowley should have a voice in evacuation I
planning as it pertains to the Seabrook power plant?
Response
The Comission regulations provide that, generally, the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (EPZ) for nuclear power plants shall include areasThe exac within about 10 miles of a nuclear power plant.
i tion of the zone is to be determined in relation to local emergency response
_J 'and needs and capabilities as they are affected by demography topogra characteristics, access routes and jurisdictional boundaries. ' Row sep'arate governmental unit which is'outside Seab'rdok'i EPZ^? * '
has been'shown~and~no isiire~hYs'S'eWFai' sedin'thlp"en
~
pFoceeding, where' affected members of the~ public can Ta7f ma'intains' tha t' Rowley'should be7made~part of' the~emergdncylpl@
pe.
Nevertheless, the Town of Rowley may also adopt such' emergency p anning measures as it believes appropriate, although these are not required as a predicate to Seabrook receiving a license.
h Question 2_
Evacuation issue-people who can't be moved...Do you feel some means should be provided for people who cannot be moved, other for than merely being sheltered?
Response
t Emergency response plans are required to include provisions for the protection f
of persons in special facilities such as hospitals or nursing homes within the For situations where protective actions may call j
plume exposure pathway EPZ.for evacuation, preplanned arrangements are made
~nt '
For the few individual patients where:in th lance and other means.
of _ medical experts ~ prompt Ev'acdiffBH Ts~iIo't'Tdiffsable, wiTeTfsve~t r
is;an appropriate protective ^ mea'starruntilithifTan'some cases,' de Fors a
~
ill e
appropriate to administer potassium iodi {(,KI).galg' set ~ ora.~
likelihood ~ of Tegetring ari~immedaW"' eta atton more than in a.
n(cigphn1,s; ext 1 'g.f fg
~
MA, 1
I ygg Questio 3_
P-Q 1.ocation issue-Seabrook. Has the summer beach population been fully.taken'into consideration?
~
l 4
g i
Response
Yes. The guidelines in the reference. document NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1 specify that each licensee's plan shall contain time estimates for evacuation within the plume EPZ based on population estimates that include consideration of transient as well as permanent residents and special facility populations (e.g., schools, hospitals, and nursing homes). Consideration is also given for both normal and adverse weather conditions in the analysis. The. Seabrook_ Station JyAcua_ tion?
Time Estimates and-Traffic Managementz Plan, submitted. by. Public-Service;oGNew of..the site inc{desgtojtakpop,gajiggf{gur,pp,Qrggummer and wiiitirNi'thWid"iii Hariipshire..proy
'u' ding, summer average and peak population 4estJmatesMonthe b'each l
s areas.
g,r cop Question 4 As we have yet to receive all of the information on Chernobyl, what are your opinions on reducing the radius from 10 miles to 2 miles?
Response
The NRC has indicated that it intends to begin a reassessment of emergency planning, in light of any new insights arising from our extensive research on severe accident releases or " source terms." We consider it appropriate that any such reassessment should also include pertinent information f. rom Cherncbyl, taking into account the significant differences between the Chernobyl design and that of U.S. reactors (see response to Question 12), as they affect accident risks. At the present time. the NRC has formed no cosition whether the size of the plume exposure EPZ should be chanced.- op4 gg pgf A M & (/Crnbn Question 5 I understand that the low level licensing requirements have been reduced as they pertain to issues of evacuation problems that may arise in a city or town. This change has enabled questions not to be resolved before a license
~
is issued. Given the Chernobyl incident and the problems and questions surrounding the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plymouth (which has been branded "the worst-run plant in the US"), do you think we should reverse again and require that evaluation issues be resolved before a low level license is granted to any new plants?
Response
The NRC's decision to grant low power licenses prior to arriving at final positions on certain regulatory issues, including emergency planning, is based on the conclusion that the risk to the health and safety of the.public from low D
power operation is not compromised. Analyses of many plants recently licensed V
by the NRC show that the risk from low power operation is several orders of
.~,
e
l magnitude lower than that at full power operation. This is primarily becau:e l
(1) the fission _ product inventory at low power operation is substantially less l
than at full power, (2) saf.ety system requirements (e.g., numbers of pumps needed to be available) are much less at_ low power, and (3) operators have substantially more time to respond to events and tak,e corrective action.
With respect to Chernobyl, the NRC's preliminary evaluation of that accident has concluded that, because of unique design differences between Chernoby1 and U.S. plants, there are no implications requiring imediate regulatory action on plants licensed in the U.S.
We will be performino a more detailed j/jf fp F/Z4 evaluation over the next several months to confirm this conclusion.
g, In summary, we do not believe there is any basis at this time to change our uze /,,l9, current regulatory policies and practices regarding low power license requirements.
Question 6 Do you feel that the NRC has represented the people as well as it has represented the nuclear industry ?
Response
Yes, the NRC's regulations are designed to protect the health and safety of the public, and these have been vigorously enforced. D'uring this fiscal year the NRC has taken many enforcement actions and proposed fines against the nuclear industry for violations of the NRC's regulations of almost five million dollars.
Question 7 Has Chernobyl changed your thinking regarding nuclear power?
Response
~
Reviews of the accident and the Chernobyl d.esign done to date by both the NRC staff and others have not identified any aspects of the accident which show a clear-cut nexus to U.S. commercial nuclear power plants requiring immediate regulatory action. However, in order to confirm this judgment, a more vigorous and systematic investigation is being performed to identify those areas and issues associated with the Chernobyl accident that warrant further investiga-tion. As.such, our " thinking regarding nuclear power" has not changed.
Question 8 Do you feel that people are really informed about and know of the dangers of nuclear power?
s.
20
t
Response
The, statutory responsibility of the NRC is to provide for the safe operak; ion of commercial nuclear power in the U.S.
In carrying out this responsibility, we frequently are afforded the opportunity to explain our regulatory
- ~
and.ba,ses for safety,ijbfli fiiktherpubliciab,e g is and licensin decisions. Howey philosop gg; nuq[;igFgger.jeand.:gfsg outethMfiks
'Kt s of e
The responsi ility for energy policy and lo,n,g(pment of energy sources is assigned to the Department of Energy. The an ie d
~
Energy Reorganization Act of 1975 was enacted by Congress to separate responsibility for, regulation from responsibility for energy policy to avoid conflicts of interest.
- Emergency planning regulations!doirequirRthat information be made available-to the public~.on a'periodicibasisrdiRh~olEthey
'will be notified in an emergency and what~ theirr initialrirctionsishoultbe.
Question 9 Cost versus other fuels-obsolete?
Answer The NRC is responsible for the licensing and related regulatory functions for commercial nuclear power plants in the United States.
The consideration of the economics of nuclear power versus other energy sources.does not fall under the statutory responsibility of the NRC. We suggest that this question could best be answered by the U.S. Department of Energy.
Question 10 How many people were hospitalized in Russia?
Response
~~
At the International Atomic Energy Agency Conference on the Chernobyl Accident held in Vienna, Austria, August 25-29, 1986, the Soviet delegation informed us that as of that date, 31 persons had died and 203 persons were hospitalized with radiation-related injuries, all fire fighters or plant personnel.
Question 11 l
How old was the plant - 3 years?
Response
('
It is our understandinglhat Unit 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station
~
went into connercial operation in 1983.
I Ob l
s o-Question 12
-r -
What are the differences between the Russian plants a,nd our nuclear plants as
~
you see them?
Response
There are many basic differences between the Soviet RBMK class of plants and the U.S. commercial light water reactors. The most prominent differences are (1) a lack of a western-style containment which encloses the entire primary system of the reactor, (2) a core composed of about 1600 individual pressure tubes within a graphite matrix, and (3) a positive coolant void reactivity coefficient.
Question 13 Regarding future generations, would you recommend that we continue to build nuclear plants?
Response
As a policy, the NRC does not make recommendations regarding methods for future generation of electrical energy. Such recommendations on national policy are the responsibility of the Department of Energy.
Question 14 Do you feel that the public would be justified in believing that the NRC is not acting in the public's best interest?
i
Response
No, see answer to Question 6.
- 9 I
p)
(
I
.~.
I e
T
IMMEDIATE
\\
PRESS RELEASE
~,.
Wed., Aug. 20, 1986-Noon S
j press contact:
sh Stephen B. Comley The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100, ext.1517 WASHINGTON "In some cases, the Nuclear Regulatory l
Commission (NRC) has acted more as the protector of the nuclear industry than the protector of the public,"
acknowledges NRC commissioner James K. Asselstine. a frecuent ' lone dissenter on the five-member commission.
(Attention editors: on page four, paragraph three of the
~
attached NRC memorandum, Asselstine identifies five such cases.)
Asselstine made the observation in a recent interview l
with Stephen B. Comley, a Massachusetts businessman visiting Washington to fight the planned preliminary start-up this fall of 'the Seabrook, N.H., nuclear power plant. The plant 0
is 12 miies from Comiey.s home in Rowley, one of several towns in the area to oppose the plant.
In the interview. Asselstine craised many members of the NRC staff as "hard-working and dedicated. If given proper
~
fenm the too. the NRC could do pq omissnce end dirgr-t!,,n
Page 2 of 3 0
I VI VIEDIAT':
PRESS RE_. EASE much to restore public confidence in the agency as a fair 1
and objective regulator," he said, in a criticism of his fellow commissioners.
Asselstine, 38, was an attorney for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in 1982 when President Reagan appointed him to the NRC: his term exoires June.30,1987.
Comley runs a nursing home. Among the reasons he cites for his opposition to the much-debated and often-delayed nuclear plant at Seabrook is that, in case of an accident, the NRC has no plans for persons who must be sheltered because they are too infirm to be evacuated.
"I am not aware that this question has been faced scuarelv by the commission." Asselstine agreed.
Comley asked about cost overruns for nuclear power plant construction. At Seabrook, for example, the increases have driven the cost up to $4.6 billion, so far.
"Among the more significant reasons for the cost increases," Asselstine said. "are poor management of plant construction, lack of standardization, a design-as-you-build O
ao roach to olant construction and the need to address new and unanticioated safety issues."
C'omley also asked about safety in light of the recent accident at Soviet Union nuclear plant at Chernobyl.
"Chrsdw3r4LJbnuurg&mec4 ESLbgMai t&et a severg
O Page 3 of 3 F
F I V V'EDLATE
?RESS REL EASE nuclear accident in the U.S. 'is unacceptable, and thgt further regulatory initiatives are needed for the future if 1
we are to reduce the long-term risk of nuclear power to an_
acceotable level."' Asselstine said.
"I am not convinced that the public is fully informed of the risk of nuclear power," he added.
After meeting with Asselstine on Friday (Aug.15), Comley continued his current round of visits with congressional and adminstration aides. He has been gath'ering support in his campaign to stop Seabrook since April, when the accident at Chernobyl focused attention on the dangers of nuclear power plants.
Comley hopes to meet with the President to present a petition signed, so far, by 65 percent of the 2,200 registered voters in his hometown of Rowley. The petition calls for "a moratorium on the startup of any new nulcear plants" and the creation of "a commission to see if the NRC is acting responsibly."
Comfev said his meeting with Asselstine "has reinforced my belief that nuclear power plants should not be built in this country ever again. The risks nIe enn hieh sna +e effective monitoring of these risks is almost impossible.
"A_s far as the industry is concerned, the attitude seems
.to be 'what the oeople don't know won't hurt them.' Well,' i believe what the people don't know could kill them."
/
I
~
8 UNITED STATES h {[f j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHIN GTON, 0.C. 20555 C')
j
\\**+**l
^
Abgust 19,'198.6 CFFICE OF THE
', COMMISSIONER
- 4, MEMORANDUM F0,R:
The Files
/l James K. Asselstir.c l3 r, l -
FROM:
e
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION WITH ST EN B..COMLEY RE NUCLEAR SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PLANNING
, On Friday, August 15, 1986, I met with Mr. Stephen B. Comley to discuss his concerns regarding nuclear safety and emergency planning.
Mr. Comley is a resident of Rowley, Massachusetts.
Mr. Comley is interested in the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant but is not a party in the Seabrook licensing proceeding.
We did not discuss any contested iss'ues in the Seabrook
~
licensing proceeding.
The following is a writter sumary of my responses to Mr. Comley's questions.
Question 1:
Do you feel that the people of Rowley should have a voice in evacuation planning as it pertains to the Seabrook power plant?
Answer:
As a general matter, I believe that the 10-mile emergency planning zone (EPZ) established by the Commission is a reasonable boundary for planning protective actions, including evacuation, in the event of a nuclear power plant accidenc.
However, the Comission's regulations are flexible in that they allow -exoansion of the 10-mile EPZ to take into account nearby facilities or features for which emercency olannino would be acorooriate.
An avamnia would be a school located just outside the EPZ.
In previous cases, I have suoDorted exoandina the size of the EPZ slichtly in a carticular area where the facts of the case indicate a particular feature, facility or problem.. area which can affect overall emeraency olannina for the olant, An example of this is the bridge going to Cape Cod, which~ is located just beyond the 10-mile.EPZ for the Pilgrim plant.
Because the bridge could significantly affect emergency planning for the Pilgrim plant and because it is the O
principal artery leading to and from Cape Cod, I believe that it should be included in the Pilgrim EPZ,,and I have so j
stated in the past.
Whether the town of Rowlav shculd be included in the EPZ for Seabrook would depend upon the facts in that particular case.
Although this is not now a j
contested issue in the Seabrook proceeding, I understand that it may become one.
If so, my decision would be based upon the record developed in the case.
I have not reviewed
m
+
~
-2.
the situation for Seabrook, _and I,have no opinion on the
-issue at the pre'sent time.
Evacuation issue - l eople who can't be moved... Do you feel i
Question 2:
some means should be provided for people who cannot be moved, other than merely being sheltered?
Answer:
f am nnt aware that this cuestion has been faced <nuaralv by the Comission in any orevious ca'se.
As a general matter, the Comission's regulations require that emergency planning within the EPZ provide for a range of protective actions.
These can include shelterino. but for at least sem ecr4daat cituatinn< evacuation may be necessary for
<nma or all of the oecole within the EPZ.
Thus, emergency planning measures have been required to include needed transportation, particularly for those who are unable to evacuate themselves.
I agree with this element of our emergency planning requirements.
For this reason, the Commission emphasized the need foi arrangements for ambulances and buses if evacuation is needed for a care facility for elderly nuns near the Fenni-2 reactor.
The Comission has also considered the need.for s.heltering and evacuation of prisoners in detention facilities located near nuclear power plants.
However. I do not believe that th_e Comission has faced the situation in which evacuation is impossible for some individuals within the EPZ and the only alternative is sheltering within unprotected facilities.
Question 3:
1.ocation issue - Seabrook.
Has the sumer beach population been fully taken into consideration?
Answer:
I believe that this is a contested issue in the'Seabrook
~
proceeding. My opinion on this and other contested issues will be based upon the. formal record in the Seabrook case.
I have no opinion on the issue at the present time and I cannot discuss it with you.
Question 4:
As we have yet to receive all of the information on Chernobyl, what are your opinions on reducing the radius from 10 miles to 2 miles?
vno are ouite correct that we have not yet received all of j
Answer:
+ha infnmat8nn needed on the Chernobyl accident to assess O
its #oteatie' i=oact oa emeraeacv o'>""i"a -
't see== to =e
.that the Chernnbvl accident may well raise ouestions on emeroency olannino.that cut the other way -- that is, is the
~
10-mile EPZ 1arge enough and should we consider expanding it?
It seems to me that this is an caen ouestion until we
-oroive additinnal infnmation on the causes. secuence of coeats enA enneannonene nf the Chernobyl accident. -Over the
-past three years, the U.S. nuclear industry h,as advocated n
]
0'~_'
~
-3 m
~
~'
reductions in the radioactive source term (the estimates of the amounts and typ.es of radi6 active materials which could j
.be released during a serious nuclear acciderit).
The industry argues that these reduced source terms would justify relaxations in several NRC regulations.
Chief among those is a reduction in the size of the emergency planning zone, perhaps to an area as.small as two miles.
The-American Physical Society and others have identified a number of areas where additional work. is needed to provide a-sound scientific basis for any source tenn reassessment.
They have advised that across-the-board reductions in the source tenn are not yet justified, and that specific numerical reductions are unwarranted.
The Comission has not yet taken action to reduce the source tenns, and our technical staff has advised that any across-the-bo,ard reductions in emergency planning zones are premature.
The staff has rejected at least one site-specific proposal to
. reduce the EPZ for the Calvert. Cliffs. plant on the ground that the request is premature.
Of course, any licensee is free to propose a site-specific reduction in the size of the EPZ for the plant and the individual proposal would be considered by the Comission on its merits.
Question 5:
I understand that the low level licensing requirements have been reduced as they pertain to issues of evacuation problems that may arise'in a city or town.
This change has enabled question not to be resolved before a license is issued.
Given the Chernobyl. incident and the problems and questions that surround the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plymouth (which has been branded _"the worst-run plant in the US"), do you think we should reverse =gairT and require that evaluation issues be resolved before a low level license is granted to any new plants?
Answer:
The Comission's regulations require ade'quate emergency planning measures to be in place prior to the issuance of a full-power license, but not prior to the issuance of a low-power license (these 'are -limited to no more than five percent of full power).
This decision was based upon the technical judgment that a plant beginning operation and not going above five percent power fails to generate the-quantity of fission products and decay heat which could pose a hazard to the public requiring evacuation or other O
protective action.
I agree with this technical' judgment
.i that the risk to the public from low-power operation _of a
'l new plant is very low.
Some have' questioned whether the Chernobyl accident affects this judgment since that accident apparently occurred at low power levels.
However. our staf.f 1
advises that the situation at Chernobyl was quite different-because the olant had been operating at higher power leyels
)
fne enma time with the consecuent build-uD of fiS5 iou
)
nrnducts and decav heat.
Havino said this. I should note
_4 p
4 5 [ D hat I~ opposed issuance of a low-power operatino licensa h D
t
_ the Shoreham plant on the ground that there appeared to 5t exist an outstanding emergency pianning issue which mio8e O
_ orevent that plant from ever going into full-power f
operation.
In the circumstances of that case, it seemed to me unwise to contaminate the plant until the Comission had i
resolved the outstanding emergency plannino issues.
Such circumstances may well arise in other cases, and I will have to examine each case individually.
But my decision in Shoreham turned on the wisdom of contaminatino a clant that mient never receive a full-power operatino Ifeense and not on the risk to the public of low-oower coeration.
Question 6:
Do you feel that the NRC has represented the people as well as it has represented the nuclear industry?
Ansder:
I_ believe that in some cases, the NRC has acted more as the protector of the nuclear industry than the protector of the public.
These cases have included the Comission's decision to allow operation of the. Indian Point plants in the face of continued significant deficiencies in emergency plann'ing; the Comission's decision to reject the safety improvements recomended by the NRC staff and.the hearing _ board in the Indian Point Special Proceeding; the Comission's decision to allow the restart of TMI, Unit 1; the Comission's decision to end the search for further reductions in the risk of severe nuclear accidents in the Severe Accident Policy Statement; and the Comission's decision to restrict the NRC staff's ability to develop needed new safety-requirements in the Comission's backfit rule.
My views are well documented in my dissenting views on each of these decisions, and they have been widely pubif~cized.
For the most part, I am the only, member of the current Comission who has opposed these actions; however, one other 3
Comissioner opposed the backfit rule.
Despite my opposition to these key Comission decisions, I believe that j
.the NRC contains many able and dedicated people who are L
comitted to the regulatory mission of the agency.
If given the proper policy direction from the top, I am confident that the agency could pursue its regulatory responsibilities in a manner that would restore public confidence in the NRC as an objective and fair regulator that puts the interests of the public foremost.
p Question 7:
Has Chernobyl changed your thinking regarding nuclear power?
O Answer:
The Chernobyl accident has not dramatically altered my views on nuclear power or on the key regulatory issues which are before the NRC.
I continue to believe that nuclear power plants can be operated, built, and designed. safely, and that they should be a part of our overall energy mix.
i In reaching this judgment, I recognize.the substantial g
t.
- , 5 _.
]
O.
~
~
-ccmitment to nuclear power which we already have in the U.S.
The. challenge is to ensure that the approximately 125 plants we have in operation or under construction. are run safely.
Hence; Chernobyl has unde ~rscored my belief that a severe nuclear accident in the U.S. is unacceptable, and.
'f that further regulatory initiatives are needed for~the future if we are to reduce the long-tenn risk of nuclear power to an acceptable level.
In a recent letter to the President of the Atomic Industrial Forum. I outlined mv nwn assessment of our current understandino of the riske n) nuclear oower and the steps that I believe are needed to roa,,c. that risk to 'acceotable levels.
I am pleased to note that as part of its recent Safety Goals Policy Statement the Comission agreed to a statement that an objective of our regulatory process should be to prevent the occurrence 'of a severe nuclear accident -- that is, an accident causing damage to the reactor core -- at any U.S. nuclea'r power' plant.
This statement, together with the Comission's recent increased attention on the_ operating performance of U.S. plants, particularly those with a history of poor perfonnance, is an encouraging step in the right direction.
Question 8:
Do you feel that people are really informed about and know of the dangers of nuclear power?
Answer:
I am not convinced that the public is fully informed of the risk of nuclear power.
The issues are often complex, and the debate on the issues is ' frequently polarized and somewhat distorted.
In my recent letter to the AIF, copy attached, I attempted to describe my view of the risk of a nuclear accident, including the uncertainties in estimating that risk.
A's I noted.in my letter. I do not believe that we fully understand that risk. and we should not be afraid to say so.
Questior. 9:
Cost verus other funds - obsolete?
Answer:
As I understand your question, do I believe that nuclear power is obsolete based upon cost considerations?
The Comission's regulations focus on health and safety considerations rather than on the overall cost of nuclear power.
It is true that the cost of nuclear power has increased substantially in recent years, particularly for the large new plants.
The cost of operating and maintaining the older existing plants has also increased significantly-over the past several years.
Although there are many o
V reasons for the cost increases, among the more significant are poor management of plant construction, the lack of standardization, a design-as-you-build approach to plant construction, and the need to address new and unanticipated safety issues, including those arising from the Three Mile Island accident. Whether nuclear power remains competitive QQ
' O
\\
m
}
J
~~
\\
with other alternatives is difficult to say.
It acoears, however. that due to a combination of factors. includino
_ reduced d6 mand for electricity, financial conditions. and uncertainty about costs and safety requirements, that no U.S. utility at the present time is prepared to comit to i
build a new nuclear powerplant.
Question 10 How Many people were hospitalized in Russia?
A'nswer:
I do not know the answer to this question.
We are awaiting further details on the Chernobyl a.ccident at the upcoming meeting df the Interna ional Atomic Energy Agency late this month.
g g
g OUESTION 11.
How old was the plant - 3 years?
Answer:
The reactor which had the accident at Chernobyl was the newest unit of the four-unit Chernobyl plant.
Although I do not know the date on which the unit began operation,1 believe that the plant had been in operation no more than three years, and perhaps less.4 g
~
Ouestion 12:
What are the differences between^the Russian p1 ants and our nuclear plants as you see them?
Answer:
There clearly are a number of design differences between U.S. nuclear powerplants and the Chernobyl plant.
Other Russian plant designs are more similar to ours.
I do not.
believe that we have enough detailed design information about the Chernobyl plant to ful.ly understand their design or the significance of the differences between their design philosophy and ours.
We are awaiting more detailed design information at the upcoming IAEA meeting later this month.
However, quite apart from the design differences between the U.S. and Russian plants, there are some broad lessons with applicability to the U.S. nuclear program. _One of these is the unacceptability of a severe accident here and the need to ensure that sufficient steps are taken to prevent such an Ihave\\
accident from occurring and to limit the potential for a laroe offsite release of radiation should one occur.
oracosed initiatives. described in my letter to the AIF,.
which would accomolish these obiectives.. Ih addition, there are specific safet'y areas, such as hydrogen control, which may require additional attention based upon the i.nf
- o O
obtaiaed from cheraobyl-bt \\\\g m '
Ouestion 13:
Regarding future generations, would you recomend that we continue to build nuclear plants?
dd
_y; p
Answer? -
I -believe that we should retain tile nuclear power option for the future in this country.
When I examine. other energy alternatives, it appears at the present time that coal and nuclear are the principal means available for providing-large central station generating facilities.
Conservation and other options are having a significant impact; however, it is unclear whether they can eliminate the need for new large generating facilities at some point in the future.
But if nuclear power is to remain a viable' option for the future, three conditions must be met.
First, the existing plants must operate safely and there must not be a severe accident at any of the existing plants for the foreseeable future -- at least the next 20 years.
Second, we must
' restructure the process for desionino, constructino and operatino future nuclear plants.
This restructurino must include greater use of standardized designs; the development of essentially complete desions before the start of construction; better, more centralized management of the construction process; greater attention to construction cuality assurance; improved desions which emphasize creater margins of safety, simplicity, ease of operation and ease o_f maintenance; Detter utility management; and improved operations and maintenance perfonnance.
Third, we must male continued progress toward developino a safe and environmentally acceptable solution to the nuclear waste disposal problem.
Each of these areas, in~my view. is in need of attention if nuclear power is to remain a viable cotion for the future.
Question 14:
Do you feel that the public would be justified in believing that.the NRC is not acting in the public's best interest?
1 Answer:
As T noted in my response to question 6, I believe there i
are scme significant Conmission decisions in recent years in
^
which the Commission has acted more as the protector of the industry than the orotector of the oublic.
In such cases. I believe'that the oublic would be.iustified in concludino that the NRC is not actino in the oublic's best interests.
At the same time, as I noted in my previous response, the NRC staff is composed of many hard-working and dedicated people.
If civen the orocer oolicy cuidance and direction, the NRC could do much to restore oublic confidence in the acency as a fair and objective regulator, and in the safety nr miri n,-
nnwar a s well.
32.
September 26, 1986 pf4
/tl6's abo f(A
- Senator Paul Laxalt Russell Senate Off ~e Bldg.,R323 A.
Washington, D.C.
40510 e
Dear Senator Laxalt:
Following up on my telephone conversations with your office, I would ' appreciate your giving me a written
'esponse to the r
documentation I left on September 4, 1986, along with actions you j
plan to initiate to ensure that the safety of the American people i
is maintained as the first priority.
The issues and concerns I brought to your attention are extremely important to the American people.
As you may or not know, I have formally met with Mr. Asseltine, an NRC commissioner, on Auoust 15, 1986, who concurs that our nuclear plants are not safe.
t i
Honefully, we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 1
Americans to die before oeoole start takina Mr. Asseltine's ccmments seriously.
i I initially spoke with Mr. Abbott, who in turn referred.me to Mr.
Sam Ballenger.
On September 17, 1986, I met with Mr. Ballenger for one and a quarter hours about my concerns for safeguarding the health and welfare of the American people.
The reason I have come to your office is that I have been told
_that you are the closest to the President.
I'am told by hiah rankino NRC officials that the President is not aware'nf wrongdoing within the Nuclear Reaulatory Commission.
The NRC is' under his administration and there is only one viable solution.
That is to dissolve the current Nuclear Reculatory Commission and
__ appoint a new commission that will renresent the nennie.
The Democrats are already preparing their case and will move very soon.
You beina the Chairman of th'e Republican Party, I'm sure that you are aware that Mr. Sununu, oovernor of New Hampshire as mal 1 na hn1dinn t-h o nnaieion of head of the Reoublican covernors, should be reminded to reeresent the will of the people instead of-l the will of the industry.
If he does not, I predict that the
' Republican party will be losing a governor to the Democrats.
I suggest 'that you set up a hearing on behalf of the President tnac woula suocoena elanteen tormer and oresent emolovees of the NRC that I recommend, as well as investicate the sunnression nf
'information by the NRC that would have nosed a licensino t h re a t' do various nuclear plant throughout the. industry.
e 33
?
Senator Paul Laxalt l//4 A.'(,-itY d M iro ' M i L September 25, 1986 Page Two
-e -
I have been a member of the Presidential Task Force since 1982, and share a creat deal of respect and admiration for Mr. Reagan and what he has done for our countrys.
As you may or may not know, I have been in touch with Frederick Ryan's office by telephone and letters on many occasions, for the purpose of meeting with the President.
In this proposed meeting, I want to brina this information to his attention firsthand.
I feel that it is only richt where this is happeninc under his administration'that he should hold the reins on this :.ssue.
I must receive your response as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
J Sincerely, Step en B. Comley Washington Location - Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 Massachusetts
- (617) 948-2553 S
e e
0
- 3tf
September 26, 1986 O
p4 MKds0 MAI Senator Alan Simpson Chairman, Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation 262 SDOS (R-WY)
Dirksen Senate Office Building 224-3424 Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear S'enator Simpson:
Following up on my telephone conversations with your office, I would appreciate your giving me a written response to the documentation I lef t with Mr. Curtis on September 4, 1986, along with what actions you plan to initiate to ensure that the safety of th6 Americcn people is maintained as the priority.
On September 4, 1986, I met with Mr. Curtis and he promised he would speak with you.
Unfortunately, I have left numerous
_ messages with no written response as yet.
The issues and concerns I brought to your office are extremely important to the safety of the American people.
As you may or not know, I have met formally with Mr. Asseltine, an NRC commissioner, on August 15, 1986, who concurs that our-nuclear
' plants are not safe.
Hopefully, we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans to die before people start taking Mr. Asseltine's comments seri6usly.
i I am officially and respectfully requesting that you arrange for 4
a hearing to subpoena eighteen former and present employees of t h e. N RC-that I recommend, as well as investigating the suppression of inf,ormation by the NRC that would have posed a threat to the nuclear industry.
In so doing, you will represent your constituency, as well as the rest of the American voters, the way in which they expect you to.
I must receive your written response as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, hg e/ en B. Comley Washington Location - Sheraton Grand U
(202) 628-2100 Massachusetts
- (617) 948-2553 b
-9
3 September ~26, 1986-p - ff.ef.se #A40 4
4
'h I
Senator Peter Domenici
^
Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Dirksen Senate Office Building
['
Room 434-i-
Washington, D.C.
20510 i
l Daar Senator Domenici:
i
.Following up on my many telephone conversations with your-office staff, I would appreciate you giving me a written response-to the documentation I left with your secretary on September 4, 1986, along with what actions you plan to initiate to ensure that the safety of the American people is maintained as the first 4
prior.ity.
I spoke to Mr. Gilman, on September 15, 1986, and again s
}-
Wsdnesday, September 24, 1986.
In our conversation of 9/24/R6.
ha relt enat the likelihood of a nuclear accident in this country was "a matter of odds" and the " odds" were low because our i
t,echnology was so much further advanced than other countries.
1 unrortunately, he omits many significant contributina factors 11xe tne structural deficiencies experienced by many of these plants, includina Seabrook.
More importantly, the potential of human error definitely exists in any plant, as the Russian people j
gnfortunately found out in the Chernobyl accident.
I The issues and concerns I brought to your office are extremely'important to the American people.
Are you going to wait for 500,00 or 1,000,000 Americans to die before you ^take Mr.
i Asseltine's comments, at the very least, probable?
l g
l I would like to have you have Mr. Gilman confirm our f
conversation as I have been keepina careful documentation on the i
stance of our leaders in their attitude of safeauardino the security of the American neoole.
i i
I am officially and respectfully requesting that you arrange for a hearing to subpoena eighteen former and present' employees of the NRC that I recommend, as well 'aus investigating the 4
l suppression of:information by the NRC that would have posed a i
threat to the nuclear industry.. In doing so, you will represent your constituency, as well as the rest of the American voters, the.way in which they expect you to.
l 236>
i
- h Senator Peter Domenici September 26, 1986 Page Two 4
I must receive your written response as expeditiously as
^ ~ '
possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, Ste hen B. Comley Washington Location - Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 i
- (617) 948-2553 i
e i
4 O
O l
t O
3P l
(
yh It&lf
<,0 M4TL 1
l September 26, 1986
~
Senator Steven Symms Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation 509 Hart Washington, D.C.
- 20510,
Dear Senator Symms:
Following up on'my telephone conversations with your office, I would appreciate your giving me a written response to the documentation I lef t with Mr. Routson on September 4,
1986.
I would like to know what actions you plan to initiate to ensure that the safety -of the American people is maintained as the first priority.
I spoke with Mr. Sam Routson on September 4, 1986 and again on September 17, 1986.
In my conversation with Mr. Routson on 9/17/86, he stated that he would look into the situation further yr and get back to me by the 23rd of September.
Unfortunately, to hg6 edate. I have not received a written response.
I have since spoken with Mr. Younablood on Sectember 25, 1986.
A f.g The issues and concerns I brought to your office are extremely important to the safety of the American people.
As you may or may not know, I have met formally with Mr. Asseltine, an NRC commissioner, on August 15, 1986, who concurs that our nuclear plants are not safe.
Hopefully, we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans to die before people start taking Mr. Asseltine's comments seriously.
I am officially requesting that you arrange for a hearing to subpoena eighteen former and present employees of the NRC that I recommend, as well as investigating the suppression of information by the NRC that would have posed a threat to the nuclear industry.
In so doing you will represent your constituency in your state the way the voters want you to.
I must receive your written response as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
O Si cerely, O
k wep i
om ey Washington Location - Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100
,7
9 REEEurf T. E' iff, CMaenesan
(-
N a['"
\\
eentemps. Tux."'
I
'( h
.""". "M "::t '
.a'll=*" ~
f q""' "OL"ll'=
TF" 3Cnifeb Slales Senale J
f
[
cOMutTTEE ON ENVtftONMENT AND PUBUC WORKS j
N' Jesus w. vm an. -
. staar osannon WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 October 10, 1986 l
1 Mr. Stephen B.
Comley
+-
Rowley, Massachusetts 01969
Dear Mr. Comley:
This is a response to your letter of September 26 requesting that I arrange for a oversight hearing on NRC activities, par-ticularly safety standards and suppression of information.
For several reasons I won't act on your request.
First, if a hearing is to be held it is the the respon-sibility of the sub-committee chairman to call it.
To my knowledge, Senator Simpson has no intention of. conducting such a hearing.
In candor, it would be ext remely dif ficul t, alth'ough not impossible, to squeeze another hearing into the schedule now.
Secondly, I cannot agree with vour assessment of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Certainly, any organization has room for improvement and the NRC is no exception.
However, I just can't the view that safety is as lightiv recarded as you indicate. nor_
can I accept that NRC totally mis-managed and inept.
My own o.b s e r v a t i o n s and experiences with NRC people haven't indicated that-I acknowledge your dedication and sincerity, but I'm firmly convinced that time will show that your concerns were not well founded.
Sincerely S t,e.v Symms United States S ator AJ,&
i e+
o o
i g
(
l i
I September 26, 1986 h
pgdil.'
m p/
v Congressman Udall 235 Cannon House Washington, D.C.-
20515 Following up on my telephone conversations with your office, as
'~
well as meeting with Mr. Henry Meyers on September 11, 1986, I would appreciate your giving me a written response to the documentation that I left with Mr. Meyers, along with what cctions you plan to initiate to ensure that the safety of the American people is maintained as the first priority.
The issues and concerns that I brought to your office are extremely important to the American people.
As you may or may not know, I have met formally with Mr. Asseltine, an NRC commissioner, on August 15, 1986, who concurs that our nuclear plants are not safe.
Hopefull we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans to die before we start taking Mr.
Anseltine's comments seriously.
I know at times I have appeared abrupt and aggressive with the people I have met with.
The reasons for this are that I am frustrated because the politicians the voters have elected are not meeting their responsibilities.
I hope we can work together to promote the safety of the American people.
While speakino with your administrative assistant, Mr. Henry Meyers, he related to me that the general feeling of Congress and others is that our nuclear olants are safe enough.
The general public has the same impression because more accurate information r=gerding tha
==fa'y nf '- h a = a ntic l ea r power olants has been suppressed by the NRC.
I am officially and respectfully
" requesting that you arrange for a hearing to subpoena eighteen former and present employees of the NRC that I recommend, as well as investigating the suppression of information by the 'NRC that would have posed a threat to the nuclear industry.
In doing so, you will represent your constituency, as well as the rest of the people in America, in the way in which,they expect you to.
I must receive your written response as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely, e
C ley p Washington Location - Sheraton Grand V
(202) 628-2100 1
- (617) 948-2553 9
September 26, 1986 f
Nf(1%k0 ?IfrL
,)
N v
Congressman Gejdenson 1410 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Congressman Gejdenson:
I would appreciate your giving me a written response to the documentation I left with your office on September 4, 1986, along with what actions you plan to initiate to ensure that-the safety of the American people is maintained as the first priority.
The issues and concerns I brought to your office are extremely important to the American people.
As you may or may not know, I have met formally with Mr. Asseltine, an NRC commissioner, on August 15, 1986, who concurs that our nuclear plants are.not safe.
Hopefully, we will not have to wait for 500,000 to 1,000,000 Americans to die before people start taking Mr.
Asseltine's comments seriously.
I have left several messaces at your office and finally talked to
_Mr.
Don Adamson at length on September 25, 1986.
You were recommended to me by someone in.the NRC.
I elected to come to you because my efforts to let Mr. Markey know of my presence were not successful.
I am officially and respectfully requesting that you arrange for a hearing to subpoena eighteen former and present employees of the NRC that I recommend, as well as investigating the suppression of information by the NRC that would.have posed a threat to the nuclear industry.
In doing so, you will represent your constituency, as well as the rest of the American voters, the way in which they expect you to.
I must receive your written response as expeditiously as
- possible.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
.b St phen B..Comley Washington Location:
Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 Massachusetts:
(617) 948-2553 i
40
p?<
n.>$cu
>EnL-3 (h
V
, The Sheraton Grand 525 New Jersey Avenue, NW Wa'shi ng to n, DC (202) 628-2100 October 2, 1986 Congressman Edward J. Markey 2133 Rayburn Building Washington, DC 20515 VIA REGISTERED MAIL
Dear Congressman Markey:
Af ter numerous calls and conversations with your office, I finally received a call on September 25th at 10:07 a.m. from Mr. Scott Leabman.
I must say that I was very disappoi nted that you did not cet back to me earlier.
/'
As you can well understand, I have since contacted a number og Decole in an attempt to set uo a hearing.
My coal is to pursue any avenue that I feel is helpful in representing. the interests of the American people.
It is my understanding that the hearing of October 6 th nas been p'ostponed.
I would like the opportunity to speak at this_
hearing when it is rescheduled and would aooreciate any assist-ance you can off er in this regard.
/
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
.L - r. f.
?
-/
/
Stephen B.
Comley
/
Mansion Drive
^'
Rowley, Mass.
01969 (617) 948-2553 1
O l
~ _ _,..,._
. ~.,
, n.-.
i SEABROOK OPPONENT DELIVERS AIRBO.RNE MESSAGE 3
JMiss'achuseus businessman opposed to Public Service Co. of New Hampshire's Seabrook.1 escalated his publicity campaign against the project last week by having an airplane circle the State House in Boston, trailing the message "Peopic Yes, Seabrook No."
Stephen Comley, a nursing home owner whose business is located about 12 miles from the Seabrook sta.
tion, said the airborne message was aimed at prompting Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis to stop
" fence.sitdng" on Seabrook emergency evacuation issues. Dukakis is to use the results of a study currently underway to help determine his stance on whether to cooperate in Seabrook emergency planning,-but he has yet to announce his decision.
INSIDE N.R.C. - September Is,1986 9
Comley met with Dukakis last month to hand-deliver a pedtion signed by 65% of the 4,000 residents of Rowley, Mass.--Comley's hometown. 'lhe petition asked Dnha to hold off approving the state's par-ticipation in the evacuation plan unless the planning zone is expanded to. include Rowley and similarly situated towns (Nucleonics Week.28 Aug.,11).
Comley has also met with NRC Commissioner James Asselstine and is continuing to pursue a meeting with President Reagan. Figuring that Reagan too might.need some prompdng, Comley planned to send a e
plane aloft again with a message urging Reagan to meet with him. "When they see the plane next week,
. - they'll know I mean business," Comley said -Dave Aitoro, Washington b
1 v
. \\
f
. y ;;.
l
~ :--. ' '
- ...f:gg.v { ; p.
- ,q
- gg.y '
s-i t
p
,e
+
==-
O
- m.c e
, a.o
,.,,..mm-w...
~ -.., - -. - - - - - - - -.,,, -. -.,., ~. - - -.
4
---m,.m.------
.r,---+-.-
-.m--.4
-v-
A McGraw Hill Publication I n t: o r'p o r a t i n g' N tJ C L E O N ICS a
NUCLEONICS WEEK g\\Y' I
vot 27 No. 35 August 28,19 d
1 SOVIETS TELL RAPT AUDIENCE CHERNOBYL-4 RECORD LULLED OPERATORS
,yl Before the accident that destroyed it on April 26, the Chemobyl-4 nuc! car plant operated so reliably ar so "n'ormally" that its operators had no perception of the enormous risks they were taking in their turbine experiments that night, international nuclear experts 'were told early this week at a " post-mortem" medting atIAEA headquarters in Vienna.
Key Soviet officials presenting the accident. to over 500 experts from 45 countries,and international or-ganizations wove a fascinating account of how the operators switched off safety and protection system after system in the name of expediency, knowing the turbine-inertia experiment planned that nightwas banal-it had been donc partially twice before, in 1982 and 1984-and that it had to be done before the scheduled reactor shutdown April 26.His mind-set on the part of operators, who violated a host of regulations and
. common physics sense because they-had forgotten that their machine could te dangerous, was preceded..
the officials admitted, by an unpardonable assumption on the part o.f the designers of the RBMK 25 years ago: that men would be more reliable than machines to control the reactor. Station,nanagement had com,
- pounded the problem by contracting for the-turbine-energy expenmentfrom the turbine design firsiwithout /
notifying or, checking with my.nationalau,thoritielt_..,.e.
.,,-,, 4,c g,,,. n y,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,g i
his was only part of an immense body of knowledge about and interpretation of the a'ccident and its consequences that began to be revealed. this week by a'28-member Soviet dele'gatio'nfled by,yalery,
s Legasov, member of the USSR Academy of Sciences and vice-director of the Kiirchatov Institute of b.tomi
,.- ~, m.g,c Energp,,,,,,; _,d,io6ofoitie"orfivThotir,s oiGd., d$,4i.,e,ga,,s,o,v,,,,,,,,
' N
,,,,,,,,,,,,,e,,,,. g,,p g
gg;4(foice
~
ouiltrica'tli'e (continuedon pagi H)
(
1985'U.S. PLANT G'ENER'ATING COSTS DETAlbED "i ag
-7 p
IA'EA-FO' RUM TALLIES CHERNOBYL DESTRUCTION:-
<~
'Ilone marrow transplants might have killed two ofinjured
--52ge IS '
Experts predict 3,000.to 8,000 Soviet cancer deaths
. @ge 15
. Scientists str'uggle.to undeistand what went wr9ng,,
,9-pag;e 16 s _.
Soviets give accident sequence time chart
,'i.-pages 17:19
.2.
s.
~
I SWEDEN'S' ASEA ISINEGOTIATING TO ACQUIRE THE PO1MER GENERATl'ON and. transmission operations'of Gerieral Electric or Westingliouse,' according to a ' story in "Affaersvaerlden." S'weden's lead-ing business and stock market magazine. ne story s' ys Asea believes the acquisitioriwould help ^
a
- strengthen its position in North America. Officially, Asea says that " talks are underway" but will give no additional information. A Wesdnghouse spokesman said the company regularly evaluates its investment in its various businesses; however, it is not the company's practice "to speculate on our future involvement in any business." A GE spokesman said the company has a long-standing policy of neither confirming nor denying rumors of acquisitions or divestitures.
~ Asea has made ho secret of being on 'th' acquisition trail. The com'p'ariy has strong'cashnsets-to' tall-e ing at least (U.S.)S t.5-billion-and it said in its 1985 annual report that it was interested in acquiring other companies. nis summer, Asea acquired Stromberg Oy of Finland, a heavy electrical equipment manufac-turer, and the Abex Denison Group of Columbus, Ohio, a manufacturer of hydraulic components'.
An Asea subsidiary Asca Atom has cross-licensing agreements for nuclear fuel and services with Wes.
tinghouse.-Robert Skole. Stockholm; Michael Knapik. Washington h.
ENEL PUTS BRAKES ON NUCLEAR EXPANSION AND RESEARCH PLANS.
He board of directors of ENEL', Italy's state-run utility, has decided on a change in 'straiegy that is likely to narrow its already limited activities in the nuclear field. ne modification will involve a reduction in both nuc! car power plant construction and experimental programs.
De board's decision was revealed by ENEL Chairman Francesco Corbellini in an interview with a
.=
protest groups such as Greenpeace. The ALP party platform specifically advocates the embargo until j
France halts its weapons testing, and no move was made to change that provision at a party congress last
. month. But since then, government officials said, the trade picture had worsened, and maintaining th.c '
>de uranium embargo would have required other" unthinkable" cuts. Australian producers welcomed the news but predicted the French would not be in any rush to resume trade since they are currently wc!!-supplied with uranium.
NIREX SEEKS TO AVOID CONFRONTATION WITH WASTE SITE PROTESTERS l
Officials from Britain's Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive (Nirex) are n ccting with local antmuc! car groups near three proposed low-level nuclear waste sites to try to persuade theni to allow ex -
4 pioratory drilling to proceed. Demonstrators blocked contractors frorn entering three of four proposed.
w-sites-Killingholme on Humberside, Elstow in Bedfordshire, and Fulbeck in Uncolnshire-on August 18.
ney promised to go to prison rather than give way. Drilling at the fourth site, Bradwc!! in Essex, is already being delayed so the Ministry of Defence can clear it of possible unexploded World War II bombs.
1 Nirex is seeking to avoid court injunctions against the demonstrators by holding local meetings. ne fact that the groups agreed to hold talks was seen as a positive sign, a Nirex spokeswoman said.
' Niret is scheduled io' choose one of tiielites for development in 12 18 ' months, with seven months of
~
~
1 drilling to be followed by a period of offsite aialysis and onsite borehole monitoring. Once a site is selec-
-.... led..it will be subject to public hearing (NW,27,Feb 8).-Stephanie CoolpdSandy Bullock, London, WEST VALLEY PROJECTCLEARED BY DOE FOR ONSITE RADWASTE. DISPOSAL f bOE haiclehred tiid.saIy for the'6asite dis;io' sal'oflow-le' vel radwaste' generated by the. West Yalfey Demonstration Project by finding no significant impact in an environment. a
g secbsiirig'to 'aTFEEx. Tor Westinghbuss's Wads TechholopSerVices Divisich, the contractsgierator -
~~
)
of the projectforDOE.-
An estimated'460,000 cubic feet of radGaste, to be generated by West Valley'as part of high-leve!
4 waste reprocessing and vitrincation, will be disposed onsite using both shallow trenches and an above-j W,vy.wvvigr6 dad ttunulus/hossidNhile' disposal'of the:dryactive:portiost of the' waste,.wiltbeginasicaryar,this.: m.j :,pr:
j fall, disposal of the'cem'ent-solidified liiiuid Gaste will probality not take plac^e until late.1988, he ex' ;
2 3 i. ~
f-j - -
< : plained. -
.. De EA finding on. the radwaste disposal plans was actually a required component of the overall project
- Environrhentallmpact. Statement approve'.for West Valley in 1982, sccording'to a DOE source. Radwaste.
d i
s.
. 'from.the project was exclude'd from possible disposal at any of DOE's s,ix disposal sites used for Defense 1
D'epartment waste, and could not'be disposed commercially due to the quota system. established in late j
1985 by Congress for each state's wastes, he explained..Much of the equipment for processing the high.
level waste at West Valley is already installed, and cold functional ~ testing of the equipment is. slated for l
(
- Jariusry 1986%ith a' goal'of operations the following March, he said:
'.ne West Valley.use ofit tumulus-composed o'f a concrete pad, walls,' nd removable roof slabs a
]
covered byylay and earth--for the solidified liquid radwaste will be a first for both DOE and Westin-i ghouse', he said. Siinilir plans'fofa tum'ulus are iri the works for DOE's Savannah River site, though, he
~
, added. ne solidifteil wssteisistimated to ripresent'about one-tfiird of the 460,000 cu ft total, hs estimated.
l DOE has reopened bids for the' construction of the tumulus after first round bids cane in too high, he ads i
ded.-Charles Thurst.on, New York.
~.
MASSACHUSETTS TOWN SEEKS EXPANSION OF SEABROOK EMERGENCY ZONE While emeertainty about Public Service Co. of New Hamnshirl's Senbmok cmcreency nlannine tone continues to stymie the unit's start-up, a small Massachusetts town is attempting in get the zone expanded l
so that it too will be included in any emergency evacuation plans.
~
l Seabrook, located on New Hampshire's Atlantic coast near the border with Massachusetts,is virtually '
I completed but its licensing is uncertairi because Massach'usetts state and local officials have b.alked at pir.
ticipating in the plant's emergency evacuation procedures, j
Anwirv ie nnteide the 10. mile evnenseinn,nne hur many of its children attend school within the zone.
rmereenew nisne esti rnr the'ehildren to be evnensted to another Maunchusetts town. In addition, citizens l O.
crekine hnenirnt enre nfren travelinen the vnne and under Kenbrnnk's evacuation nlan immnhili7 rain.
dividuals-such as.some hospital patierits-will not be evacuated during an emergency, but'rather will be..
!s sheltered on-site.
For Stephen Comley, a Rowley nursing home owner and the prime mover behind the town's antie Scabrook petition drive, the decision to shelter the immobile in place smacks of age discrimination. '"The (age) discrimination issue has never, to my knowledge, been challenged," Com!cy said. "! feel it is dis-N.
~,,,.t.,~,__..__,_
in
--_----._-m,,
-.,,..-. i
cnmmation-leaving people behind.-and I intend to cha!!eng,e that.1*ve asked the NRC and Seabrook to addcess it, but they' haven't responded."
\\
The New Hampshire Yankee spokesman said Rowley's acdvism is "an emotional reacdon m Nr-noby!" that is being " agitated" by antinuclear groups in Massachusetts. "We find it ironic that (the an
'~]
tinuclear groups) are urging people 'within'the zone not to participate and urging people outside the z 1
try to'become part of it." Here is "no technical basis" for increasing the EPZ, he added "Ijust don
.\\
m
(")
. any logic to it at all."
4 "Rowley's posidon is unique," Com!cy argued. "We're in, but we're out (of the 10-mile ra put us in, they've got to put Haverhill in too." he adds. "Itat's a city with around 50,000 people."
has hand-delivered the town's peddon to Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis. The peddo 65% of Rowley's 4,000 cidzens, including children-asks the govemor to hold off approving the st' te's participation in the evacuation plan unless the planning zone is expanded to include Rowley.
a
.y
-Dave Airozo, Washington
~
GAO PROJECTS $99.9-MILLION AS N-REACTOR 1995 UPGRADE COST It would cost the U.S. govemment $99.9-million to safely operate the Hanford N reactor as a weapons production facility through the mid-1990s, according to the General Accounting Office (GAO).
In a report prepared for Sen. Mark Hatfic!d (R-Qre.), chazrman of the Senate Appropriations Commit-tee, GAO said the N reactor, widch has been in operation'since 1963, now has operated three its expected life "and many systems and components are deteriorating." Maintaining safe operatio
. through 1995 "will require considerable upgrading and rehibilitation,"'GAO said. To extend the facil beyond the year 2000 would require major renovadons costing as much as $1.2-billion.
he Appropriations Comminee August 13 approved a Hatfield amendment to cut S21.9million, the
' fiist installment of funds for extehdini; the N re:ictorbey'oind 1995, from thieriergy appropriati6ns bi i
(!fW,14 Aug.,2). Given the, concem over.the safetyictthe Nreictorandthe high'costof keeping it opera
~. ~~
ing, DOE is studying the feasibility of replacing it by convertinir, to a defense production ri: actor one of tw mothballed reactors belonging to Washington Public PowerSupply System (NW,21 Aug.,3)'. One Wh7.
1,is'on the Hanfoni reservation.
~ '
WNOrii;iiiallf~dsi2Edf6TilibiddiffpMdiktioidN rete"wi's' modified for stea W:
~
~
' since 1966 has generat:5 electricity as wellJ
, GAO estirriat6d in'itirep6rt that,"io u'pgraddtlie N"reaitor for safe operadons through 199'5, safety in struments containing tens of thousands of electronic cornponems would have to be. replaced," costing 536-million of t!ie projected $99.9-milliori'refurbishrrient. Another $17-niillion would got to replacing
~
. discs.in exh of,theleactor's't,003 pressure tubes. :-dicDragpe'rt, Wdshington ~ '
~
A NEV/. SWISS ANTINUCLEAR INITIATIVE, CALLING FOR'A-10-YEAR MORATORIUM on.all nu-cle' rfactivity, has been launclied. ne initiative idaimed at preventing ariy (Ether prpgiciss on'the a
- delayed Kaiseradg' Qi!Irii, Willi tid Icing.r'ange j;o'a! of giving nuclear opponents time to plan a national s
program for abindoning nuclear power by phasing' out all opeiating' plants. Coming,in the wake of the recent statement by Swiss President Alphons Egli th51 Switzeridad~could seek future altemadves'to nuc! car power (NW,7 Aug.,1), the newest inidative could appear rnore attractive to votdrs than previously defeated ones. '
" Previous antinuclear inidative' s have been d' efeated in Switzerland, the mosi recent one 1984 by 55% of the voters (NW,27 Sept. '84,5). But observers of the Swiss nuclear scene say that the' concept of a moratoriuin 'of a specified duration might win voter approval. A utility official noted that, duc
'o a variety of circumstances including Chemobyl, Switzerland altcady is in a "de facto" moratorium.
He initiative, called "S topp dem Atomkraftwerkbau" (Stop nuclear plant construction), has been ad.
vanced by a committee from regional and local antinuclear political parties, along with some dozen leadin ecological and environmental groups'and a wide range of smaller organizations. To put the initiative to a national vote,100,000 signatures must be gathered in the next 18 months. Enough votes could be gathere by the end of this ye:ir. According to legal sources in Bern, the earliest possible date for a vote would be in 1989, but it would likely be later.---Laura Filarski, Zurich INDIA'S DEPARTMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY (DAE) HAS GIVEN UP TRYING TO FIX RA 1
end. shield and must decide whether to suempt replacing the end. shield or to write the urdt off, according to O
press repons. Because the replacement is an untried tactic that would require development of sophisticated -
1 O
' robots, it appears possible the DAE willjust decommission the first unit at the Rajasthan Atomic Power', b,
~"
Stati~ n(RAPS).
o ne Press Trust of India (PTI) quoted Malut Srinivasan, chairman of the Nuclear Power Board, as I/
Q 12 NUC'LEONICS WEEK - August 28.'1984
's.,,'
~.
.a InsideNR.C IhM
~
o
%/
An exclusive report ort the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
)
voi. a. No. is - september t.1986 DENT'ON ' O ASK FOR REVIE1M OF O!.D SAFETY' ISSUES IN LIG'HT OF CHEfiNOBYL
'"q T
~l1 NRC's director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Harold Denton, says there may be
[
Iessons to be teamed from the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident for the U.S. LWR safety program.15 Vienna, where he was a member of the U.S. delegatioit attending the Chemobyl post-monem last week, 1
Denton said he intends to ask the NRR staff to "re-c.umine" past decisions and studies in light of the acci -
dent to see whether some subjects ot.ght to be given more emphasis or whether the accideht sheds new light on safety issues that had been considered resolved..:
For examp!e, he said, the Chernobyl reactivity excursion suggests that a new look ought to be taken at the issue of ATWS (anticipated transient without scram), for which a rule was issued in 1984 after several -
~ years of siiidy. "We tho' ghi'we'hadpiit thhiissue io licil," I$cnt6fi said. "N6w I'want to re-exsifiins iliat '
u question."
. : Denton. stressed; however, that nothing he has learned so far,'about the Chernobyl ' ccident has made
+; P
+ ' -
a
' i liim cfengt! his mind abotit t!ie adei uac~ of the U.S. Approach to miclear safety. Denton a!50'tolli inside -
'...t.-
t y c.
. NRC ihat iiia rneetiiig lastThursday withinembers of tfie Sdviet delegaiioit so the 'Vierin'a poster'rioitem; the.~
.a J
.two sides explored areas.in which collaborati6n on nucleaE safety quesdons could be increased. ~Diese will : ' -
. include specific technical issues such as calculations of pump cavitation, but elso more encompassutg sub. '
a-jects such as probabilisde risk assessment. The Ritssians, he said. "have indicated they a're interested in this
.'. -l.'BN-@'M8DN@ bee.g by[otanopedo,vieg,)"Me,6q$'wegg_.9 gg.
.u
- 4 ;. m @ ' @7 s.. Otherareas 6fcoopon have n _ ment;oned by other pamcipants m th.e mec,ung-- for example, tfie"
- e Soviets'have.stiggested nisjorinterna'tiona! cbopeintl6c on fire.preverition and fire.fighdnj; in riuclear
,. prants.,'
~
g..
./ DeStoiiiaid'thit Ns.ed bulhe bilateral disetssio'nilasde'ek,.'s am kery hopeful !!iat[nhEr a6l '..
E t.y.carhiagwecanjsume;U.S Sovietcooperationjinl nuclear-safety l*.
h
~ '.,, -
In fadt the, commission staff's post-Chemobyl"relook" proces' has begun already and dates from right '
s s
after the accident. As more informadon has come out about the causes of the accident, Denton has adjusted
..., the' focus of theNRC's. interest. Froin having ordered.a review of the Fort St. Vrain design based on early.
?indicatioris of.the giaphite firhat Chemobyl, the empliasis has shifted to the issue of the positive ' oid v
. coefficient, which played a crueli! r' ole in.!c'tting the Soviet:re' ctor r'un aivay.' '
a
.D Denton, as we!! as regulators from other countries present at the Vienna meeting, recalled that the U.S.-
had..done experiments involving reactivity'excursipns in the1950 sand into the '1960 sin,a series of" Spurt"
' tests.at Idaho National Engineering 1.aboratory. In those experirn'ents' in which such excu.-sions'were in.
-~
itiating by'. rapidly pulling control rods,."we literally b!cw apart reactors to' test this sort of phenomenon,"
.Denton said. In contmst, Chemobyl-4 went " auto. catalytic" in an enormous power ramp due to the specific.
' characteristics'orits design and the unique circirms'tances in which thh reactor had been placed by the operators.
Denton said that more precise informadon being made available day by day by the Soviet delegation-and "they are giving all information that is reliable"-indicates that what happened at Chemobyl "does not fall into.the category.of a nuclear explosion.:The total amount of energy released was not that big." The Soviets have indicated that the pressure from inside the core from the first steam explosion (due to interac.
tion of fragmented fuel and what was left of the coolant) was of the order of" tens of atmospheres," which in the case of Chernobyl design was sufficient to lift the reactor roof slab and move it sideways. Although INSIDE THIS ISSUE...
Omnibus licensing reform standardizadon billintroduced
-p2 AEOD releases data on 1985 trips in U.s. resciors
-p?
NRC of6cial emplines remarks on Nureg.I150 -
-p3 FPat.begins mandatory drug testing for sorne employees
-p9 Price Andenon compromise may have $5-billion esp
-p4 NRC reducing inspections as top performing p1 ants
-p i l SMUD commits to EFW system upgrade for Rancho seco
-p5 Ohio group asks comrnission to delay vote on Perry I cense
-p l 2 FRC says design change led to Catawbe 2 incident
-p6 NilY seeks to load fuel before EPZ hearings are emiplete
--pt:
a
of the division of safeguards in NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety & Safeguards (NMSS). The commission voted 3-2 to adopt a policy statement endorsing the guidelines rather than ador> ting a newTule proposed by NRC staff that wo'uld ha've required standardized procedures ~ for access anthorizadon
~
- -O
~Ihe August 4 story also failed to note that under the revised regulations, plants must change or rotate keys, locks and combinations "whenever a person's unescorted plant access authorization is revoked for j
cause or compromise of the locks is suspected." Changes in the regulations are designed to provide addi.
tional assurance that plants are protected from ins: der sabotage and to prevent security measures themsel.
ves from hindering safe plant operations.-Brian Jordan, IVashington FLORIDA POWER & l.lGHT CO. (FP&L) HAS STARTED MANDATORY DRUG testing of'supervi..
. sors at its Turkey Point and St. Lucie stadons and will begin a similar testing program for 400 to 500 other 4
e employees October 1. Six hundred union employees, all of whom have varying degrees of unescorted ac.
cess in the plants, will not be affected and no plans are in. the works to make urinalysis part of the union contract, said FP&L spokeswomen Susan Vaughan.
Employees subject to the urinalysis will be tested for eight cfmifications of drugs, including cocaine, marijuana, gnethaqua'Ione, opiates, phencyclidine or PCP, bea_mA=~ pines including valium and librium,.
z
' amphetamines,ind barbituates.
. To guard against inaccurate results, the employee,*s sample is divided in half. One halfis frozen, while the other halfis tested If that' test is positive, then the second half of the sample ~is tested by a different' - -- ~-
.. technique. If both test are positive,,then the employee is assunted to have,taken drugs, Vaughn said.
- .:,.....,...,;.... Eniployees wiiofail the urmalysis. test lose theirunescorted access el==L=riaa and.will be waaa-ily.+..
.e
.seassigned foriminiinurh'of 45 days"Ihe employees also'will be urged to go to the employcie assistance %*
~
c."..pogram.Tlie. utility does not. fire'on.first offense,1*= it believes in.rehabihtadon, Vaughan saida *. ' *..
', During the 45 days,-employ.ees can ask for another test. lf they do not t!:ey automatically are tested at the end of 45 days.-If the tests come up posinve then or if positive tests shois tip in later random testing, the.
J u'dlity handles it on.a' case-by-case basis.-David Kohn, Deerfield Beach. Fla.
m:.g.:n mJ li8 HE1 RECORD.ew m.n; m.gm.wm. ::n.em.n mm.s v--a-OX y;;. m.o e.
e
~
l' "Following a.n August 15 discu'ssiori with a'Massachaietts anti-nuclear activist, NRC Commissionetl '
~
~-
- ; l ' [ Jamed AsselstinEIormallyEbmijted tiiNRC's public doedment room writtenisyss torquestion
.... L.7 h.hpwec/ die activisii:onceritinsnucles/poni plant libi
.. C ^.
'T:?'i hird b nuclear;-
l v
.L..
~
..b.
irt the United State's iri generaf Following sie excerpts from Assels' tine's responses -
' Q') Do y'ou feel tliar the NRC has represented'the (public) as well'as it iras represented.the nu'elear industry 7
'~
- A) I b'eIIeve that irisome. cases, the NRdasacted piore as' tige poiector of the nuclear indusay thms: the protector.
l of fhe public.'Diese cases.have: included ths commission's-decision to allow' operation of the Indian Point planti lii the".
face of continued significant deficiencies in emergen'cy pIanning; the commission's decision to reject the safety trn -
/
, provemeius recommended by the NRC staff and'the hearLQ biierd in ih's Iridian Point special prooseding; the sommis.
~
', ^
sion's decision to allow tiie. restart of Thice Mile Island-1; the cornmission decision to and the seerdt for funher reduc.
i-a, tions in the risk of severe smclear.acciderits in the severe accident policy stasement.and the commission's decision t' -
~
o
' ' restrict'the NRC staffs sIldSty to divesp needed neh safety'imiuirtinents la the commision's'beckfit rules. My views ar'e-well'documertied in'my iiissentirig' views on each of these decisions'; asd they haw's been widely publicized.
l
.For the most part. I am the only member of the current commission who has opposed the backfit tule. Despite my opposition to these k' y iximmission ifecisions. I tielie' e that the NRC contains many able'and dedicated people who are e
v commined to the regulatory mission of the agency. If given the proper policy direction from the top. I am confident that the agency could pursue its regulatory responsibilities in a manner that would restore public confidence in the NRC as an objective and fair regulator that puts the interests of the public foremost.
..Q) HasChemobyl chaoged your thinking regerding nuclear power?
, A) The Chemobyl accident has not dramatically altered my views on nuclear power or on the key regulatory issues which are before the NRC.! conti::ue to believe that nuclear power plants can be operased. built. and designed safely.
and that they should be a part of our overall energy mix.
In reaching this judgment. I recognize the substantial commitment to nuclear power which we already have in the U.S.The challenge is to ensure that the appoximately 125 plants we have in operation or under econstruction are run safely. Hence, Chernobyl has underscored my belief that a severe nuclear accident in the U.S. is imacceptable, and that further regulatory initiatives are needed for the future if we are.to reduce the long-term risk of nuclear power to an ac-I l
}
ceptable level.
+
Q) Do you feel that people are really informed about and know of the dangers of n.iclear power?
I A) I am convinced that the public is fully informed of the risk of nuclear power. The issues are often comples, ard the debate on the issues is frequently polarized and somewhat distorted.,In (a) recent letter to the (Atomic Industria!
Forum). I attempted to describe my view of the risk of a nuclear accident. including the uncertainties in esdmating that
--e,,.
.--.--...,-n--,-e,e----,,r,
-m--
e w----.,-n
~-,,
,,n,,,
,.e
,-wm.,.
,~---r--
r..e men,v,-
y
---,,m-a--v v --
h.
risk. As I n:ted in my letter.1 dn not believe that we fully, understand that risk, and we should not be afraid to say so (INRC.21 July,4).
O **
Q) Regarding future generations, would you recommend that we condnue to build nuclear planis'l'
~~
r O
A) I believe. Piat we should retain the nuclear power option for the future in this country. When I examine other f
energy ahernadves, it appears at the present time that coal and nuclear are the principal means availabic for providing large central stadon generedng facilides. Conservadon and other options are having a significant impact; however, it is unclear whether they can eliminate the need for new large generating facilides at some point in the future. But if nuc! car power is to remain a viable option for the future, three condidons must be met. First, the exisdng plants must operate safely and there must not be a severe accident at any of the existing plants for the foreseeable f.uture,--at ! cast the next 20 years. Second, we must restructure th'e process for designing, constructing and operating future nuclear l
plants. Third, we must make continued progress toward developing a safe and enviror. mentally acceptable soludon to the nuclear waste disposal problem. Each of these areas, in my view, is in need of attendon if nuclear power is to
- ^
remain a viable option for the future.
j THE NRC AND THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) are studying whether to revise NRC rules on emergency-alerting siren systems at U.S. nuclear reactors after three administrative
, lawjudges with NRC's Atomic Safety &-Licensing Board (ASLB). expressed concern Wr,the adequacy of the siren systems. Developi,ng standards for such' systems lies with FEMA, but the rules are NRC's (10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E).
7 'NRC's rules oriPromptPublic Notification Systems were brought int & question by ASLB judges James '
Kelley, James Carpenter, and Glenn Bright, who wrote NRC Chairman Lando Zech about their "significant.
~
concern" that the rules ~may not be adequate in alerting essentially everyone wi, thin the.first.five miles of the -
~
.~
10-mile einergenc'y planning-zone and within Ifminaies o'f a sdclearemergenc;.' ' '
. 2he leuer was prompted by the judges'. Aa+ian in.an operating.bcen5e proceeding that included con- ~.
+-
4 sideration of a siren system,In that g.w. %.g concerning Carolina Power & Light Co.'s (CP&L) Shearon Harris nuclear power plant, thejudges, acting on FEMA recomm,end'ations, found that the plant's alerting system met NRC requirements for summer nighttime conditions. But their letter to'Zech said perhaps those d'.;:p' x. 33uiren3ents,,;fp[g,S,7,n,.uc,learp.wgplant@fm,.go f,arkno, ugh.in;all situations; ;.3..,,, g.3.; y.<. q;.,3 %..
.~:c..-
4%"We conunue to 6e concernedallo.ut the technical adequacy of'the' FEMA st'andarif forjudging nuclear. co.
' pow r plantiireri syste'ms',for nihttrim.'e con'ditigns'", thejudges told Zech. FEMA saii! the siren standard in -.'
fa. sparsely, settled area like the one around Shearon Harris is a rsinimum sound of 60 decibels outd6 ors in
(, Q' ? ;,. favorab'le tinis for aldrting people;against which a ' standard should b
+.,
I '
virtually ekjorie is indo6rs and asleep. "I '
c'
" ' " e-Msecond conce'rn expressed to'Zecli was NRC's agrectnent with FEMA in the Shearon Harris proceed-ing that that siren system.would" arouse ahd alert" a'pproximately 90% of the people in a nighttime ein'er.
4. #.,
gency.cion's' requirement # ' essentially 100%' alerung."'Ihey added thai, by adding a tone alert radio.sys.
tem in the public's bedrooms with'iri Sve miles of Shearon Harris, an " alerting level" of 98% could be ex.
' pected, a "clearty'satisfacidry lessiiri dus view.". #' '
- A third concern of thejudges was over winter nighttime,
- alerting!!n the Shea'ron Harris proceeding. it
. as the FEMA /NRy position that the"worsi case"in which to alert people'woulli be s'ummei 6ightdme w
.co'nditions with air c'ondidoner noise to oveitiime. on Harris, betweea 75% and 90% of w"mdows would be clos'ed in wintcr, and that in colder ciimates virtualfy all' bed'ioom wi..doks would be closed.
I
. The jiidgei suggested to Zechlthat additional alerting devices pc.t.aps should be required in aierting sys-tems such as tone alert radios installed in the public's bedroonis rm runctor, automatic telephonc dialers.
activation of alerting devices with signals carried by regular househok. power lines. and mobile sound i
sources.
Zech has sought FEMA /NRC staff recommendations on the points.rrised in the leuct, sources said,.
with airiew to wh' ether NRC's rules should be revised. FEMA and NRC sources said the staffs have begun reviewing FEMA's technicaf evaluation of the Shearoif Harris sitization' arid the rationale and history of
=
NRC's notificati,on rules ihat were adopted, thdy said,'in'1980.---Dick Maggrert, Washington THE FIRS'T h'HASE'OF CONSOLIDATING NRC' OFFICES AT THE AGENCY'S new suburban Wash l
ington location will cos: about SS.8.million, but the agency is going to come up with the money by delay-ing some projects with funds already allocated and using funds from some completed projects.
NRC did not include' ftinds for the'long. awaited rn'ove in its fiscal year 1986 budget because the l
prospects for consolidation were uhclear when the budget was wriuen up and the timing of the decision that j
permined consolidation made it impractical to pursue a supplemental budget request, Thomas Roberts, ac.
ti,ng NRC chairman said in recent letters to the agency's congressional oversight'comminees.
, So to make the move, NRC asked for and was granted approval by the committees to reprogram funds 9
=.------w n-..--.-----..-,.
w.w,-,,-.<-,a
,n---
--rv-------,,v.--na..- - - - -vv.-
e
}
Q1
..w
.. [...,. :..,
..,7
.t
., m..
(
.f.. W w.j+ ty i
gg.
gq c)
.; v r g.y e:
.~ r,.
. r.k T O
P
.a.
.....n.,
~ ~
Co;ntey pays for all this acuvity witli his own
,j
- -- - -- J
' f,
TM BOSTON CLORE FRTDAY, SEPTTMBER 19.19M 15 ~.
money. Sea View !s a small hursing home ("that's
. why it's so good." he says) where the residents do a q.,7 tot of flower-growing and bird-watching. He has spent between $12.000 and $45.000 and is ready to MARY M'eGRORY spend more because he's "so ashamed I didn t get 4.
Involve'd before."
"A lot of people call me a nut." he volunteers.
.f If he is, he could scarcely be more off-the-wall n
than the evacuation proposals he is protesting. In G
,L the wakeof Chernobyl Sununu engaged a distin-guished scientific panel. Including two Nobel laur-f.y 7
eates, to advise him about the safety of Seabrook.
Q
,1 They have assured Sununu that in terms of con-struction, operation and what they prefer to call WASHINGTON - Steven Comley, a stocky un-
"the emergency response plan." things could not blinking man from Rowley. Mass. is hardly of the be better. -
Clark Clifford school of lobbying. Suave he is not.
"What's he te!!!n* us?" snorts Comley. "They He barges into government offices and says. "Why have human error at Three Mlle Island and in Rus-the hell....?" He does not see establishing friendly sia, but they don't have it in.New Hampshire?"
relations as a measure of success. "I made him The 17 towns in New Hampshire and the str in mad as hell." he reports about a congressional aide Massachusetts within the 10-mile radius all have whom he was trying to persuade to investigate the their own draft plans, and the same bright thread Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
of lunacy runs through them. Parents are. for in' He dealsjust as brusquely with the press. When stance instructed not to try to retneve their chil*
he fails to persuade a reporter to cover one of his dren from schools when the sirens go off. Their imtlatives, he says. "Oh. sure, you'!! wait until young will be transported to other towns by bus, there are 500.000 dead. then youil go for it."
wher'e parents can go and find them later.
Ever smce Chernobyl launched him "!!ke an Comley's two sons attend a regional high school unguided missile." a fnend says - he has been in Newbury that is within the 10-mile radius and charging about in a solo effort to stop the openmg so would be under the orders of the Emergency Op-of Seabrook. the New Hamcshire nuclear power crations Center, which presently has no junsdic-plant that !!es 12 miles awa'y from Sea View, the tion in Rowley.
nursing home he owns and operates in Rowley.
Tom Moughan, coordinator of C!tizens Within First he ranged the town of 4.000 !!ning up !.400 the Ten-Mile Radius, points out that some drafts residents to sign a petition to Massachusetts Gov. "
call for the dispatch of city buses from Boston.
Michael Dukakis demanding that Rowley be in-some 40 miles away, to pick up stragglers and pe*
cluded in evacuation plans bemg drawn up in the.
ile without cars. There is talk of having earless event of a Seabrook acetdent. Then he went to the.
ople put ribbons on their doorknobs. But since State House ;n Boston to badger Dukakis in person
~
the buses - provided enough drivers can be found not to OK the plans - a move that would effectively to head into the fallout - will ply only certain keep Seabrook inoperauve.
routes, residents of side streets will have to run to
- While his wife runs Sea View. Comley darts in the corner and, as Moughan says. " hope that the and out of Washington. He haunts the offices of bus will get them before the radiation does.
the Nue! ear Regulatory Commission and peppers
. What ke ps Comley going at his headlong pace the commissioners with letters. He had an inter-are the plans for nursing home and hospital pa*
view with the newest appomtee. James Asseltine.
tjents that as the Newburyport draft says "can-during which Asseittae conceded that the commis-not be moved."
ston " acted more as the protector of the industry The Darwinian instructions advise shutting
- than the protector of the public."
doors, windows and outside air vents and." moving 1.!ke every other Washington petittoner. Comley patients / residents to Inner rooms / hallways if pos-wants to see the president. A reg!stered indepen,
dent, he has voted for and contributed to Ronald sible."
-."What the hell kind of way is that to treat yirar Reagan and thinks that if he could sit down with inother or your grandfather?" asks Comley. None him, the president would have to stop Seabrook. .'
of the smart people he is pestering have answered
%He's had no luck,so he's taking his plea aloft.'
him yet. - ".: - Y*.'. "? *.* * : L - '~ ~ c'/ 9 as he has done before. Comley, a sky diver. befleves'.,
_.;fw --
-.e J..
In overflights. He has hired planes to fly over Bm :
,c,Many McGro,n; is a,, syn ed cohunn%.
J. ton to goad Dukak!s.and over Concord. NR ts/
- g.. -c v e..,-4.,.
. % 4 disparage Gov. John Sununu, who is fending off a vigorous reelection challenge from anti-Seabroo
,.h.
J.j
-,* * ---* s.~ E. 4E F. -
^
r-elements. The president wt!! soon see a streamer up in the cieuds that says."Mr. President. See Mrc ComL-y."....C -
2
~~
^
l s
"...a-g-a mp rr !
V,
-a r
P,..Psins'inaketisiphsWB1--
i
.y ug..:. :.
O;,.:. a y c Seabic$g.:ok eva;j..,oplam syJOHNIMPEMBA Mjg g dNuke 3 ant"Oe DUZZes seasan accident at the 1.eabook nuclear power plant, (, A B.iY STATE man at.
passed within 2 miles of-making evacuation of tempting to nieet with the White House and Capt.
must never open.
l the risk areaimpossible, President Reagan had a 101, about 1,000 feet in the Qmley,thepnenf 2e plane towing a banner nJr.
SeaView Nursing Home in says a Baf State watch-bass close to the Capitol Under federal regula. Rowley,a solsarme with dog group, building and White House Lions, private planes are a
Itien by Rachel shim *=Jc of the M-chusetts Public In.
in Washington yesterday.
prohibited by law from g
j Stephen B. Comley of passing within a " restrict.
tered voters who want the terest Research Gtcup said Rowleyanardenttoeofthe arandom survey of 391peo.
Seabroot Noelear Power ed airspace"over the Capi.
town included in any tot and White House.
g emergency p,,,g,g 3,,,,
ple la the Seabrook risk Plant, saad the plane car.
For the past several President Reagna, how.
sone one weekend last ried the message "Mr.
weeks Comley has been in ever. was out ot town yes.
j month showed that most Resgan, please see me."
Washington trying to visit terday campaigning in
- i would not know how to get The privately hired out of the area.
plane, towing a banner Reagan and getamessage New Orleans for a local Shlmshak said the group with 7. foot high letters, that the Seabrook plant
-JOHN IMPEMEA across to federal officials Republican congressman-chose to do the survey dur.
s Ing a summer weekend be.
2 m susa-Varkey wams of 'f:oxic nig: mare'j i
sands of visitors who are
, famillar with the ares.
not,When you talk to real WA3HINGTON - A people about what theT House subcommittee
" Internal (NBC) docu.
tuents and the public rec.
would do during a nuclear chairman charged yester
- ord show that NFS Erwin I
accident. It becomes clear day that a nranium fuel the current evacuation plant la Tennessee is a is the most dangerous h7M W.
{
uranium fuel production WWd" work.,for Seabrook wca't
. toxic nightmare, oozing '
plans plant that the NRC 11
~T^
said Shinshak.
radioactive contamina.
But John Kyte. a spokes
- tion " and federst regula.
ceases," Markey said in man for the Seabrook plant, tora have not properly ad-opening a hearing on the
'A called the survey's results.
dressed the problem.
Erwin plant by his House l
" simplistic.
The amusations by Rep.
energy conservation and -
mis!cading. premature ar.d Edward Markey (D. Mal
- power panel The random survey was-den) werestrongly disput.
"Ihe NFS plant is a malled to Gov MichaelDu-ed by the president of No.
toxic nightmare, oozing kakis.who must act soon cs clear Fuel Services,which radioactive contamina.
establishing evacuation runs the Erwin, Tenn.,
tion into work areas, into m'
plans for Mm=*ch"=etts plaat, and by the chair.
lunchroomaandothernon working areas and onto g
towns within a 10-mile zone man of the Nuclear Regn.
the so!!outside work build, EDWARD MARKEY around Seabrook.
latory Commission.
Ings," he said.
-ups.
' Feds ignoraproblem*
Do said y
10-a 11e emergency plan. how to respond."said Shim. fe'etively.... Until such a governorplans onmakings ning zone around the plant, shak.
plan is developed, the plant decision on the re said Shimshak.
Other findings in the sur. should not be opened."
evacuadon plans "quhed Re:idents in that zone vey taken Sunday, Aug. :3 Seabrook officials have before the end of the month, will receive a booklet with show that in an actual threatened to draw up their "He's considering a vari. Inf rmation telling them ety ofInformation "Dorsey what tv do in case of an emergency,42 percent said own evacuation plans for they would leave, the area; the area if Duk=W falls to said, including the Mass, emergency at Seabrook.
40 percent said they didn't approve state plans.
t-O PIRGsurveymailed.tohim. the summer the area is know what they would do; Seabrook officials have "What we found is that in Iesterday.m m'gts " reveal' ~ co L..c e.
and 15 percent aald they said they are-convinced.an.
gutvey resu filled with transients who would not leave the area.
" adequate evacuation" of me fruta all over, and it Said Shimshak. "We are the 10 mile area around the
.,,['ye o is shows that you ers't posal. far from having an eva::ua. plant could be carried out if.
g e
_..... blyeducateallthepeopleen.tlon plan that can work ef. _ an accident occurred.
L
~
~
~
l 4
L
MHE DAILY XEWSW
.e4 M r.
Newburyport, Massachusetts 3sT:.
w, q -
- d. Pa.
,,,d.,.S.ptembe,l Isse 1~, he-.h.-
m.
Seab, rook 8,pponents take action 3 y
-.g--
v Whistle blowers cite building flaws Mr,. Comley goes to Washington -
- e. l' Conitey has teen shuMng Mween.J.. e By DONALD BRICIFFA.
oc id nt
.Rowle and Washington for the past abrook officists say the char es B PAMEl.AOLASS Ottaway News 8ervice are not new, have been Investigafed Itaway News Service severa weeks as part of a drive to j
's BOSTON - Citing claims of poor and found te be unfounded
- WASillNGTON - A Rowley man's Ng g[,Pda ge[a of nuc esand a rc>nu-G.(-.
s construction, opponenta el the sea-er crusade to win a meetin with Presl*
o brook nuclear wer plant yesterday "The alle ations are nothin more and a ed wron doln a*
called for an ent inve ligation than an lith r att t la d sy Hw dent Iteagan and enplain t e dangers al ege,,llefitude at he I uclear I egula. ;E og Into allegatione safet t
,s g e,_,, muttear power took to the air bere Seabrook'sconstruction.y violations in {or {ew.flampstdre Yankee, fhe mana-yesterday.
tory Commission, the federal afemic.t*
ency -
ement edmPany overseeing Sca*
Steven Comle, owner of Sea View charged with overseeing the a lTm'on'g'. lcg Hurstng Itome, fdsed a private plane $f$ie meeWwith Reagan, Comley Y'"-
He most serious alkgationa lavolve indust I8 it cement used to build the containment lona were cement that flew in the unrestricted air space says he also plans te present a petition k M butiding, the huge domed structure sur-near the 11S. Captiot with a banner that 8
roundin the nuclear reactor dest read: "Mr. Reagan, Please See Me.
h to contfoe radiation to case ofned an Whlade,page A13 Camley."
4 Comley.page A13 4.,
~.a.aa
... un - -- -
a COMLEY: Rowley man takes his message to the Capitol rwnanswt freenpage Al Gov. John Sununu, a Seabrook pr o-the rendeavous with iteagen, is to "When there's no evacuation ponent, whols being challenged by get a commitment from key con-plan for someone who can't be signed by 1,60o ofilowley's antl Seabrook eendidates.
gressmen such as flep. Edward moved, that's discrimination. i registered voters calling for the Comley sold his research has Maskey, b Mass., chairman of a When an evacuallon plan can't president te keep Seabrook inoper-unearthed Information that dis-Itouse subcommittee wnh over-provide for everyone,. there i
attve, and for a moratorum on the quellfles" the NitC from behig the sisittup of all new power planta nation's watchdog of the nuclear sight over nuclear power issues, to shouldn't be a (nuclear) Industry," g*
that are awaitinglicenscs.
Industry.Comley sald he has tound investigate the NitC end subpoena he says, his voice strong and 18 HitCofficials to testify.
steady.
Comlfy said he decided to use evidence, mostly from talking to he long term goal, he says, Is Although Comley's efforta have the plane tactic af ter repeated el-disgruntled Nite employees, of to halt Seabrook and all other nu-not yet produced an appohitment forts to work through the prest-wrongdoing and decisions tnade by clear power plants.
with the president, his perststent =
dent's schedultng office were top management that favor the Comley, the father of two high-calla to the press have resulted in
-delayed or stymied. Ele estimates industry.
"The president 14n't aware of the antinuctent crusade after dis-crusade.schoid aged lacys, says he got into several newspaper accounts of his 1 the cost for the one hour fitght at
,a i
$a00, which he says will be paid what's happening at the NitC," coveringwhethebelievestobethe Washington Post columnist with his ow n funds Comley salJ In a recent interview. tnadequacy of evacuation plans for Mary McGrory detailed Comley's.
Ile has staged similar flights in "And I think he'll be very upset
/
Massachusetta and New if amp-whenheItndsout."
school children, hospital patients efforts in f.er column nursday, and nurstng home residents mho with a dig to off!ctal Washington i
shire aimed at keeping the Sea-eComley has talked to and dug-Ilve in the Massachusetts towns that "none of the amart people he brook plant closed. The enessage ged just about everybody in Wash-located near the plant.
la pestering has answered hirn ever the state capitol in Doston Ington whohes anything to do wlth "That htt every itber in my yet."
urged Gov. Michac,a t uhants not the NILC - federal officials, ron-body," Condey said in en inter-Comley hopes that this kind of to submit evacuation plans for the gressmen and their ataffs, former view at the Sheralon Grand llotel pressure, coupled wtiin his builtsh sta Massachuscits towns within NitC employees, the White llouse, near Capttel Illit, where he has persistance and nagging phone Seabrook's 10 mile zone. ne one and the press.
In Concord, N.II., was aimed at IIIs imme:* late goal, aside from mock office. transformed a bedroom into a calls to federalofficials, wulpteld some resulta.
1 8
e l
i O
'a 0
of fare
- Be X
%' 'w4 3 Rolfa Road s
Lexington, MA 02173 September 19 i
i
Dear Steven Comley:
Just a note to tell you that what you are doing is terrific!
I've been ranting for years but never put the energy and imaginativeness into it that you are.
On the other hand-do you suppose that the evacuation routes could simply take over and revise some of the old FEMA plans for what we do in a nuclear attack? Here in Lexington, we were directed to drive up good old 93 (together with folks from a lot of other places hereabouts) to Littleton, NH, which would welcome us with.40 square feet per person for the duration. We were directed to take along a shovel and clean socks.
(I'm not kidding.
Somewhere in my files is 4
the booklet that said that.) Our fire chief,.who' also is our Civil Defense director, said that sometimes he watches the traffic on 93.and reali::es that the best thing we can do in a nuclear attack is go out to Pine Grove and sit down.
Pine Grove is a cemetery.
Ditto power plant accidents.
While you're on the offensive, don't forget that nuclear power, besides being dirty and dangerous, is economically terrible. We (the country, that is) laid our bets on the light-water reactor and peddled it abroad too fast, just to beat out the other guys, when in fact the technology is appropriate only for moving submarines from one place to
- another, Now the costs in dollars ~are stunning.
Nucir tr power, like nuclear war, is bad for business, and I
it's.,y guess that it will go down on that count.
Keep st up!
i High regards,
'~'
O-Sabra Morton
i A8 Newburyport Daily News. W,dnesday. September 17. M86
~ OPINIONE
~j 4
3 w__ _3==
s.
g ms g
v c
7,flo.S y
e 7
4~
+
m MTI-STARVARS a
~
49 _ h TEST RANGE iLo_
Aga
,<./
b
/
/
M-TEM M - --
l 2
7
/_.
gg q,
s,f w
1
_n r
W.
./
Uf,.M LETTERS Fence-sitting on nuclear issue is ' intolerable' 4
- k from a member of the NRC1 Can wetake the chance I feel I had been patient with Governor Dukakis and dismtss his charges or start to believe this man?
k Totheeditor:
and other elected officials in this state, waiting for We should act nou and demand that everyone act. to M.
s
&.+
them to take deliberate action regarding the Sea prevent such an acetdent from occurrms in our M
brook nuclear power plant. However, when I semed 11fettmes.
that I was getting nowhere waiting. I chose to take a I personally am ashamed that none, except a very 34~)-
trtp to Waanington to find out more about the nuclear few. of our own state and local offtetats have stood up
'4 krtustry and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to represent us in this issue. Officiais in Wasnmston admit that our state leaders are "towitt s." It is (NRC). Some of thedisturbing things I found are:
(A.) One of the main goals of *be NRC ts to have obvious that Q1emobyl has to happen in their back.
nuclear power plants awaiting licensure, including yards for them to wake up. We have petitioned them Seabrook and the Shoreham plant in Long Island, to do something about this issue, yet they haven't New York. recetve permission to load fuel and begin acted in our behaltAll the disturDietg news and Information I obtained testing at 5% capacity. This has already happened ith the Shoreham Plant. Once achteved, admitted a in Washington is readUy available to them -if they work as I dkl to find it. I find this "fermittinC w
high-level offletal of the NRC, a "browrtout" In the area of the plant would be arranged. The goal is to intolerable. I asked Governor Dukakis and other make the public uncomfortable Dy the lack of etectrl-state agencies on June 27 to respond about the cat appilances - so that they are suckered into evacuation of shestered people in the event of a believing that the plant is necessary for power pro nuclear acetdent.They haveyet toreply,Thisis an issue that Mr. Asselstine admitte duction. The plant would be already contammated.
as Shoreham is, thereby rendering it useless to never f aced squarely by the NRC. He feels itis a very produce energy try another sourte, sucft as natural important issue! The nuclearissue is the most impor.
tant issue our elected of!!cials will f ace whtle tn oGlee gas,(8.) A hJgb off1ctal of the NRC is being reviewco and is a common sense issue. Whatuerthe Governor ble indictment by the Department of Jusuce stu encase to do, he should have done it sooner. The for Plant wul begin on m..; ungs withint the NRC. However, hearings on the Seabrook Power for this person was voted to be retamed. by a 12 vote Septemcer ll5. It seems to me that had he acted sooner. he could have had rnore of an impact at those withtt. NRC offlees, in my opinion to manrputate and suppress informauen in order to get plants running hearings. I feet it is time for them to meet these le-head on and do sornething about them.
at5% capacity.
(C.) Mr. James Asselstine. a NRC Commissioner.
In the United States, where we are guaranteed has been caued a magertek and a controversial man freedom of speech and freedom of chotte. how can by some riuclearproponents and others. However an they sit back witue there is open suppression of totervtew with Mr. Asseistine revealed enough infor Information at the NRC. whose primary goal has mation to assure the ettizens of the United States that become to open nuclear power plants, not protect the hI we will have a malor nuclear t'taaef er within the next citizens of our country 7 strPHzN s.Coutty y*=.
O
- n years unless m, tor changes are made in our Rowley e
m 3
nuclear. power pla a now. This information comes yg 1
. t. a,,
$'4.
fa O
e
-m
+,, -
p-
.A
.5.M 'Ww.eypsW.;,g.g-ny.g' c g-;y; u.q; s W..3'M 9 M T? M S P } Y '.,b M :' N.'; Q' F 3, g ;
.?~.g.a:.9. p :.:-: ; -:;..y.n y 9.~.,;;n.7,~m,g.
_ ~ _.Q e,?;n
~.y Q-
..; * ~. ~
~-
.m.' ;y n.;.,.
~..p...
- u 9.~z g
'. p.
g..
y 3.
- t.. ne - u n-,
- &.*. 4 ;:53
._ '_' [..;$b l y
v--
c c.,.';... :.; p-:i
%v ;-
, l,,.
s
-u.,.
.. f '.
..; 4;,4 A12 ' : New6udort DailyNews. Wednesday,' September 17
.:n.
E-Localtowns bhrredW* f
~
.g
~
-,,........u from~N-plant hearings
~
>-~ :s~
-m ~ ~ - u-v:.
~.. x-c.. -
i was an in any inanner on the radiological riismt<x the co attempt to " blow away the towns
'in Massachusetts in the eve emergency response plans," Hoyt
~
' CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - A fe-deralboardinchargeof reviewing "If the radiological emergency wrote.
Mnunchuesetts."
emergency pinnning for the Sea-Jane Doughty of the Seacoast nse plans which will ultima-brocknuclearplantsaysnine com-t ybeinplaceforthesecommuni-ties are to be the munitie s - ine1udin g pant-in the hearings, called the Salls-order a reversal of a 1983 Newburyport, Amesbury,t have be, then it would appear to the bury and Newbury - tha board that participation by thecommunities is a s refusedtohelp prepareemergency lar requests by PubHc Service plans for the plant can't be activepartieipaats in upeoming nead not be answered Doughty enlightenedself-interest.
However, Amesbury Seleennen saidTuesday.
Wilnam Lord said today that hewill file a motion n R
hearings.
However. at least one Massa-chusetts official said today that the i
actionwas" premature."The Atomic Safety and Licens-toreconsiderthatact o C! nettled phones open questions) because ing Board (ASLB) acted against had to," said Monday Friday: 8 a.m. to.8 g
i the communities _ for failing to an-Public Serv ceswerwritte E
that the town had pm Saturday: 8 am to Noon tion on emergency planning from 14rd, adding filed for a protective order whichwould allow the Public Service Company of New status as an " interested munici-ality" without a Hampshire, the plant's primary
.,n The.ASLB is an arm of the Nu-
-,~
owner.
l ty'It seems alittlepremature(for Ut OUT nOUSO s questions.
clearRegulatory Commi"lon.The 7
New Hampshire communities ex-. the ASLB) to rule on the sanctions On ine r'Ig'ni -
't even ruled on M
cludedareSeabrook NorthHamp-ton, Brentwood, Rye and when they ha
. theprotectiveorder,"hesaid. Lord said that the town OUn Ot,lOn 1
hadn't asked for full intervenor Portsmouth.Public Service asked the board i
status in the licensing process,
.in August to dismiss the communi-shouldn't have to fill out the utilityHe further said the Call ties from any participation in the
. proceedings, which have not beenscheduled as yet. The board in-qu d the request f
' - stead followed astaff suggestionto questionnaire, anfrom Public Service Co 2
M IDe, E 7
t limitthe communities
- rights.d Thursday, is -
><,N signed by Administrative Law CORRECTIONS FoundationDivision -
-~
-..u The order, date W2:
aneseHelenHoyt.It says the com-~ :2he saily news always seers q' q768-7519 c.It&' G cover-mrmities marnot present testimo -or' cross-esnmine witnesses.ath to be accuratein its news
~~'~%"'
oge, but wh.m. maie mis-takes, we.want to kno O
,6 %-- ' hearings ar emergency plans ex-;-
au w
- J y ws.%G,p.
&qs v-them. Readers notfag mistakes pected tobeheld this fall.M!!.1atioT we-instories are encouraged to call.j. fd ash s.5 M S. %., Pre history of the parti this
.editorCa1K111een at 4c-666Gedsubu cities',and towns' w
g has bee'n 1; series ot, pWrg,m g
-W~w
+m, m w a g direc 2 mrties,~ frequently ten.andtaensto.devepp aremrd L
i I J..
A
.w
O t
OD m[. mTL.Le.L.. L. L.;.L/11LIJ.L..D 1J.V.V..L) g..p.E;.
3 y
.... ?
- p my.o.
m..
. m.. w....
.n.
Newburyport, Massachusetts; C.+.s.....
~
- . 3.n. n.
.o
. u ra a.
penday.& : s.nu
====ts-stawe=k8rh=ediuv-d Congresslooks at Seabrooid a m^N m = A Markey panel to hold.Newburyport hearincj.
s Ottaway Newe Service ouryport Cityllall.
als Massachusetts 'towna' within le Barbaralludt of Amesbury, Ameabury Congresals coming to Newburyport.
Ilowever, City Clerk George 11. milesof theptant.
selecimea. candidates for the U.S. Sen-Rep. Edward J. Markey D Masa..
I,awler Jr., whos.e office schedules (Tomimeeting votersinipswich and ate seat and governorship of New chairman of the llouse subcommittee meetings in City Itall, sold this morn-seierimen la ffJmpion both look Sea-Ilampshire, and Rep. Nicholas Mav.
on Energy Con ervation and Power, Ing that he had not been contacted brook-refaledacilanlaaf alght.SfortesL routes & Peabody.-
O announcee to l'ashington yepterday about any congressional hearing As-page AIG I lludt said she has been urging Mar.
that bla panel w31 travel to Newbury-sistant City Clerk Patricia A. $1mmons Tids hearing is being held in re-key for several months to hoIJ the port to examine safety issues concern-said she doesn't semember a congres. sponse to the tiemendmss grousalswell hearing in Newburyport *to be as close ang the Seabrook nuclear power plant.
stonal hearing ever being held in City et requests I've received from elected as posslule to the probleen."
e Markey said his committee will ltatt.
Olticiala and many citizens in the ticini-ne NRCla schedided to decide with-Je "take back to Congress what Ihe people Markey has invited a wide range ty of Seabrook." Markey sald in a utsle-la the nest Iwe anonths if Seabrook will et of Massachusetts and New Ilarnpshire witnesses as lestify. Including federas. Inent released from bla Washington be given a license to operate at low
'd-tell us. We wul Insure that the titea-state and local efflctals. and represen-ofitte.
is gant administration does not ram 3ea-lativre from the most active groups Alde 1.Itula Correla said letters have derailleense for full operation.
power - an important step in the fe-st brook down the throats of stata and that have volced concern over the come from residents all over the Nurth Towns withen the lo mde radius have ir local authortiles who have empressed plant's operation.
Shore and Merrimack Valley, and as refused to submit emergency plans, 1
na serious doubts that public health and Invitallons went to New Itampshire far away as Plymouth. where realdents claiming that safe evacuation trom the safety can be protected in the event of, Gov. John Summu - a Seabrook propa-are Ituktng avacuation lasues at the area la virtually imposssible durtra a en accident at me plant."
pent - and Massachusetta Gov. Mt. local Pilgrim nuclear plant with those major accident, especially in the sum-According to Matkey's office, a put - chael S. Dukakis who says he'll decide atSeabrook, atmost 100 mues away.
- met whenbeaches are crowded.
11e hearing la scheduled for Monday, by the end of the month whether to llequesta for heartmas also came B.
Oct. 8. beginning at 10:30 a m. at New-continue evacuation planning for the from state legtslators, ln~ cludina fleo.
Hearing. pees Alt
._.s,.,_
HEARING: Congress to examine Seabrook in local session Continued trom pase At along the Massachusetts New IN A RELATED meATTER. a - Among efose are the potential g
"Thess issues must be resolved llampshtte burder most of the group oI Massachusettalegislators for a serious meltdowst. Inade-before a license is granted and the atate asul local gov,ernments are have called on Dukakis not to ap. quate emergency plans, tions plant is irrevec.shly contaminated saying 'no, we cannot guarantee prove evacuation plans for about the quality of cor ruction.
Iafter thelow power testal," Mar the sately of our citizens, tnat the Beabrook.
the power la not needed and aber-kege Massachusetts Democrat NILC is saying *we don't really "We think ou wul agree that no nahva enwgyis avaHatde atlower id.
care about your concerns.'That la a vocal crtile of nuclear power and an intolerable situation."
evacuallon p an for Seabrook can
- M
letter was written b the Nuclear llegulatory Commis-guarantee the health and safety of
'the Rep.
said Lawnnes Alesander, & arble.
a0 Massachusetts citizens'a**at head.Ilousechairmanof theCom-ston's handling of the industry, Markey said the hearing is also said the Seabrook situation Ulus-a res[recently by the National a letter s ll delivered ki ed bida h10 d1 use to a resolution ap*
trates a "growin crisis in fe-prove mittee on Ener(. Among those su publ detal-state relat ons over the isovernors Association that calls yederdaI*
signing'It are Nichalas J.
' Costello. D-Ameattury, the ccm.
g nuclear power industry in this on theNitCand Markey's panelle
'the legislators urge Dukakis mittee's Senate chairman, and countr increase the role of stales in the "to use eve means at your dis-Reps. Iludt, Patricia Floro, D.
g,,,7."y,$..N'.*.* "" "8 II.48"la"'a 88 "uc3**r Pa**r Posal M Hgh the Mahp of Sea. Clouc9 ster, amt 'fhemlue SpeHo.
O O
". ' =.... m.y.,.
...u,
t q n ~ e 's f.','i"sA. % ';s W'- W u =.? ~
6 w v:. :.. y. e t.,:.
. a ' y. y m.~ ~ s. T.W '.* r'.w. & :.
. --a.. c.. n.
2+
+
r
- . c..
~
REGION
. ' >. 2-Seabrook opponents predict (l
bid to shrink evacuation zone a mnioremergency.
CONCORD. NE fAP) - Sea-Seabrook's ea=+=ia===* bu11 ding, "This is clearly leading to a re-
- y The budding is intended to keep r=dimrtaa boctied up in case of a quest by the aooficant to reduce broot nuclear plant oppanacts say saidDougnty, the plant's request inr a safety reme== ment is to pave the way to reactor accident.
the size of the EI" ",k opponent.
t Plant apan*=maa John Kyte said along-cme Seacroi s-
" Jane is certamly enutled to her try to sanas Seabrooc's emergen-the eust amarmrad to a f act-finding opinson." Kyte responcea, g
cyplarunngzone.
A plant aammaa responded nusason..
ButJaneDoughty.cefdd Tetor that no decz*1co ce the issue has of the Seacoast Anti-Pollution"We have not made a formal n g' been snada but said "sny and 23 teague, predicted that the contato. request'* to reduce the zone. he ans posszbleopuans" remaza open. Consultants from Brooznavec ment study will result in an at. added. "We ba nt r-Naconal I aboratory and the Nu-tempt by Punlic Service Company front. an along, that we are eva-UV clear Regulatory Commission of New flamps tre to recuce the luaungany and au poestbleopcons
{
10-crule emergency plaammt zono spent parts of Standay and Tues-that mzgbt have to be eramarad in on tais assue."
day snatying the construcuan of Plant says Dukakis stalling I.E.
SEABRd'OK. NX - Otseials the development of an envtrou-mew.'11is obvious that the requia.
too mimed solely and direcuy at trom tne Seabroot nudear power men:a1 impact <ratammar and as staning Seacroom's startun." sasd plant yestertiay act. sed htassa arraaetve review pincess for eva-e%ser** officials of '_a'=a"aa.ny cautlos plana for new nuclear New Rampshire Yanke'e Vice eMempting to detay that factilty powerplanta,The subsequent delay. said Pr*andear V.coden P. Jen*aa "It by requinns an cu u M tm-plant ofne als. could add " bun-is very clear that the namimstra-pactrevtewof evacaut.tonplans.According to plant offteult the dreds of mena*" to the plan Dukakis adm-ration has pau-11nalpnce tag, o ma,ew e,nvironmentai regu-oniy,lantmat ddbem e wese, strate.gy made "Since Seanrook station is th staa an s..
. u assed. wound fome 6d x
me/.
=mw
- w 7... g y a ndRO#" M L
T TheHeatingSe N
O.
m gy SL l
x i
LETTERS M~
ki Can't buy insurance to cover N-plant risk
)/ O g
I h
To the editor:
damage or conteinInstion resulting from en accident j:
Q
of any kind at Seabrnnk would cause these supporters I have been reading Iciters In this r entottln
,N the virtues, mately arul necessity ofa to think Iwice alwnd safetfe your. Ilut I guen if ois claims
.u nuclear reactor, and I cannot understami how these your children for the privlIege of buyhig expensive
, fl ~
t Scabron wmdd gindly risk your li healtti Jmd the of I
/
r Y*t ?
letter writera could be lulled into such a Intse securt electricity, loss of your home can't be that much of a
- concern.
is '}
C ty. Nieclear reactions are NtYl' safe. I would think the r
6 almple fact that you cannot buy insurance in prutect MAftYlDUSUPPLE *
't your home, your land or your gessessions against the Newburyport,
s a 500 scientists can't be wrong about safety,l g
To the editar:
Itcensing commercial reactors."
I'
%e report ts in from Vienna. Arut the Initial study by Governor Sununu'a Select Panel for Post t.hernn-The results of a stinly commissioned by Covernor to
'8 byt ttestew ts completed.
Sununu, which was conducted by 15 of this country's.
Icp nuclear aclentists - two e6 whom attended thes De bottom line from the Internatinnat Alemle infernatinnal conference - concludes: "the design Fnergy Agency conference in Vienne is: no such and institullonal differences between the (two accident is tikely here.
plantal are so fumlamental that the Soviet accident does not challenge the decision made on the safety of
- One U.S. officist said. "There Is no doubt in asembronk-typeptent. s a
anyone's mind now that this (Chernehyl's) machine I
,I is very different Indeed in its characteristles from "The Chernnhyl accident, rather, conttrms U S.
one we wmdd useln our nucleer power program. hls cholces in nuclear technology erut, enore important. l is not the kind of accident we would have in our types ly, resttirms the heart of our pubtle regulatory of tnachtnes."
j, pregram, namely the U.S. philosophy of constant Upnn returning from the weckinnt meeting of 500 vigilance in the construction and o s
selentists from 50 countrier flatnid ipenton, director tors using stabledestraconcepts." peration of rese. -
e of reactor safety for the fluclear llegulatory Com-We have worldwide evidence that Amertcava de 8 3
mission, told the panel "The causes are understond, s!gns and operations are the safest in the world. Ilow the seersence Is clear, l>ut the details will have to be could 500 scientists be wrong?
studied for a long iIme. I don't ace any areas in u hlch f(ATitLEEN M. AIEt10 we need to make immediate changes in our basis for Newburyport DOONEStrUltY pg ggyrgy m AULGPAWE TAl#TP g yyyyy Awaggar 1RW10m t httMDro ttXI SUf* UM A'M trast$
SIAS Db11
)
twDs4YIT ti ans w" n**^
l muurerne WAutiASTi tM. AB nmotr Atm a-
"Exm
- d AE SIMC D
60,-AWA,,ORK re,
armm nesaoa-m pgyi gnyp r p ni,u m.
m,tro a nms. u b_
RMYERtRTF N 4
/ #8
/
g n(%o f.&L b
q hjd,.
s Q
(
fg &.
\\
i B"WE MUST ACT NOW" For immediate release.
press contact:
Stc. hen _ B. Comley The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 WASHINGTON (Sept. 24) - Antinuclear activists are praising Mass. Gov. Michael Dukakis' decision to oppose the opening.of the nearly completed Seabrook (N.H.) Nuclear Power Plant.
"We now call upon President Reagan to follow the will of the people, too," says Stephen B. Comley, a leading Seabrook opponent in Northeast Massachusetts who has gained widespread recognition during lobbying forays to Washington.
Comley has arranged for an airplane - with a trailine, streamer whose seven-foot letters read "Mr. Reagan,
P1 eas e See Me - Com! ey ! ! ! " - to fly over Constitution and Independence Avenues in Washington from noon to 1 p.m.
today.
A.t a meeting with the President, Comley seeks to
' l present a petition signed by 1,600 of the 2,200 registered page one
.IMMEDIATE 8
PRESS RELEASE voters in his hometown of Rowley, Mass.,12 miles from the Seabrook reactor. The petition calls for "a moratorium on
+-
the startup of any new nuclear plants awaiting licenses" -
such as Seabrook - and for an investigation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
Also today at noon, an airplane trailing a streamer reading " People Yes, Seabrook-Sununu No" will start flying over New Hampshire's state capitol in Concord. At the same time an antinuclear rally will be held on the steps of the capitol. John Sununu, New Hampshire's pro-Seabrook governor, is running for a third term, and Comley asserts that his continued support of Seabrook will cost him the election.
After a month of visiting Washington to meet with NRC officials and government leaders, Comley opened his aerial assault Sept.10 with a " People Yes, Seabrook No" streamer flown over the Massachusetts state capitol in Boston.
On Sept. 20, Mass. Gov. Michael Dukakis said he opposes startup plans this fall for the $4.6 billion Seabrook nuclear facility because, "The unshakable, fundamental truth Is:
O page two
IMMEDIATE 2
PRESS :tELEASE V
"If a serious accident occurs at Seabrook, as I am told by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to assume that it'will, (there is) a foreseeable likelihood of high dosages of radioactive intake, against which emergency planning and evacuation cannot adequately protect."
Comley frequently has pointed out that the evacuation plans in case of an accident at Seabrook do not include those in hospitals or nursing homes who cannot be mov.ed.
Also, the summertime influx of visitors to the nearby beaches and the area's poor road network are seen making any rapid evacuation impossible.
While Gov. Dukakis acknowledged Sunday that the NRC may grant Seabrook a license over his objections, it is Comley's contention that the NRC would never act over President Reagan's objections. And, Comley maintains that the President will object once he is apprised of conflicts of interest and other problems with the NRC that preclude that age acy from making an impartial decision..
Comley urges other citizens to join him in the fight against Seabrook. He notes that in December 1984, the Maine Public Utilities Commission became convinced that the risks associated with Seabrook outweighed possible consumer 4
benefits. Consequently, the commission ordered its three page three 0
IMMEDIATE e
PRESS RELEASE utilities, with a combined 10 percent of Seabrook, to seek ways out of the project.
e-At present, the majority owners of Seabrook are Public Service of New Hampshire, with 35.6 percent, and United Illuminating Co., New Haven, Conn., owner of 17.5 per~ cent.
Comley is campaigning for shareholders in those companies, and the other New England utilities that own the balance of Seabrook, to demand their companies withdraw from the project as financially unsound and morally reprehensible.
To those shareholders, who have watched the cost of Seabrook spiral from $900 million in 1972 when it was conceived to $4.6 billion today when it is still awai~ ting licensing, he points to a Wall Street Journal observation Monday. In reporting Dukakis' opposition, The Journal said that the " move will certainly delay and possibly prevent Seabrook from getting a federal operating license."
~
Comley asked shareholders to demand that their companies "not only consider the saf ety issue, but also stop throwing good money after bad at Seabrook."
end O
M O
. REAUrAN MU6T D
O ACT NOW!
Friday, Sept. 19, 1986.
press contact:
Stephen B. Comley j
The Sheraton Grand l
(202) 628-2100 I
(Attention editors: The following statement was issued in Washington today by Stephen B. Comley, a leader in the nationwide fight to halt the licensing of nuclear power plants and to close those now in operation. sis remarks come in response to Washington Post writer Mary McGrory's column (see attached) yesterday on Comley's lobbying government leaders on behalf of the public and in opposition to lobbyists from the nuclear power plant 1
industry.)
"I am both pleased and proud that Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Mary McGrory saw fit to report favorably on my Washington campaign, which is gaining momentum and will culminate in the closing of nuclear O
Po-er vients eii over A merica.
"Ms. McGrory won her Pulitzer in 1975. It reads,
'for trenchant commentary spread over more than 20 years as a recorter and columnist in Washington.'
$ REAGAN MUST ACT NOW!
O "Now, after more than 30 years on the Washington beat, Ms. McGrory has reported that in some ways I am
'like every other Washington petitioner.' Nevertheless, the ' unblinking man from Rowley, Mass.' has been asking the questions that should have been asked because they
'cannot be answered without showing the fatal flaws in the operation of nuclear power plants.
"The lack of an evacuation plan for everyone in case a disastrous human error is just one of the fatal flaws at the nearly. operational Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in New Hampshire,12 miles from my home.
"'They have human error at Three Mile Island and in Russia, but they don't have it in New Hampshire,' the -
Post columnist accurately quotes me as observing.
"I am especially worried about the fate of hospital patients and nursing home residents who cannot be evacuated in the event of a fatal accident.
"'What the hell kind of a way is that to treat your mother or your grandfather?' Ms. McGrory, quotes me as asking the supposedly brilliant government officials who are, charged with providing for everyone in a nuclear disaster.
"'None of these smart people' has an answer, she adds.
"Ms. McGrory makes clear that she admires my
REAGAN MUST ACT NOW!
-)
dedication. I thank her for that, but my dedication is
~
made easier because my cause is just, my concern for the safety of my fellow Americans is valid.
" Separately, I have.been reliably informed of a deception being planned to win public support for the controversial Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on Long Island, N.Y.
7
" Shortly, there 9/111 be a non-accidental electrical fail'ure in the area of the plant. Residents will be rallied to support the newly built plant as a way to bei assured getting electricity in their homes.
"I have other information on this planned deception
)
plus other nasty tricks already pulled by the nuclear power industry and the predisposition of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission not to regulate.
"I hope to present this to President Reagan, along with still more information which should result in the
~
subpoenaing of 18 former and current NRC officials to testify at congressional hearings on that agency's proclivity not to act in the public's interest."
O 64
REAGAN MUST ACT:NOW!
Tu hncms Pmy A2 Tmson.5rirasa 18.1986 -... a s THE WASHINGTON PosTINDEX MARY McGRORY l
Fighting for Survival of the Unfit' tevue Comier. a stocky.
, han'ne, where the rendents do a lot of S Mast.ishardlyof theCart anbinking man from Rowief, flower-growns and bird-watchag. He has spent $12.000 to $15.000 andis Cifford school of lobbyms. Sauve he is ready to spend more because he's 'so not. He barges into govermnent aflicas
==h==ad I didn't get inveived before."
and asyn."Why the het.. 7 He does
- A lot of peopie can sne a nut.* he not see estahtiminsg fr:endly relances as vehmteers, ameasure of anscesa.1:nadelum mad
!!he is he could scarcely be more as bag
- he reports acost a off-the-weG than the enctiance congrammenal aids wnoat he was trying proposals he is pr==nar In the wake to perumsde to invesagate the Nuc6 ear af Chernobyl Sununa engaged a Regulatary t'a=====a=
deansmahed scieno6e pensi. indoding He domin as brusquety with the presa, two Nobeilaurustes, to adyne ham Whsahe fais to persuade a reporterto about the safety of Seabrook. They cover one of hisinmaaves he says, have assured him thatin terms of "Oh,mue, you'H west anal there are construcnon coernoon and what they 50a.000 dead,theiyou'n go forit-preferto cza the emergener respoose Ever sece Charnabytlaunched plan.* things couki not be better.-
ham-9Be as unsanded mands." a
- What's he teilin' us
- soorts Comier, friend asymbs has been chargas
- They have human errar at Three Mas aboutis a seio effort to stop the Island and in Rusma, but they don't opmung of Seahmok,the nudear power have itin New Hampsharef*
piant tant Een 12 n: Gee front the nursag De 17 towns a New fha *e and home he owns and operatesin Rowley.
the six us bl===rwaam within a First he ranged the town of 4.000.
- 10-anie radius of the =rimer plant a2 limag up 1.400 ressments to agn a have drait plans and the same bngns peacon to Gov. M4=*l S. Duirains (D) thread of lunacy runs througn them.
% that Pswier be bciudodin Parents are, for mstance astructed not evacunnen plans beeg c'rawn us at the to try to retneve the r chddren from event of a Seabrook accdent. Then be schoolif the sirens go off. Their young went to the State House in Bostoe to win be taken to other towns by bus.
badger Nakisin persm not to oltsy Cemier's two scos attend a resposal the plans--e omve that would high ernant sa Peabody thatis wicna effecavaiy heep Sestrook inoperzuve.
the 10 mde radius and so would be WhGe inn wife runs Ses %ew.
under tae orders of the Emergency Coadey dar. in and out of Washington.
Operata m Ceater, unich presendy has He haunts the offices of the NRC and no jurMwwa in Rowief.
peppers the cosaan==aam with letters.
Tom Mougnan, coordmator of He had aninterview with the newest Citseens Within the Ten-Mae Radius.
appostee. James K.hadh=a durms points out that some drarts caft for the wandt Ansehne enneeded that the d= pare
- of c:ry buses from Sciston.
-aa====
- acted more as the some 40 mdes away. to pick up protectar of the edustry than the straggiers and people without cars, protector of the public."
There is talk of havmg cartess people L;ke every other Washingtoa put nbbons on therr doortnobs. But pennaner.Comley wants to see the -
mace the ;-_..
m...Jed enough pr=== lear A registered 1 he drrvers can be found to head rato the has voted for and contnbuted to Ronald faucut-wiD ply only certam routes.
Ressan,ar.' '.e thinks that if he could residents of side streets wd! have to run at down with bien, the pres Ant would to the corner end as Moughan says.
"have" to stop Seabroolr.
- hepe that the bas wtB get them before He's had no luck, so he's taking his the radiacon does
- pies aloft again Condey, a skydiver.
What keeps Comley gomg at his beLeves in overdights. He has hired headloog pace are the plans for nursmg planes to Dy over Boston to goad home and hospital patients. *wnich.* as Dukalos, and over Concord. N.H-.to the Newburyport draft says. "cannot be disparage Gov. John H. Sununu (RL
. moved.*
who b fending off a vigorousreeleenors The Darwmianinstruccons advue c53enge from ano Seatrook elements.
shuttmg doors, windows and outsiJe air The president may soon see a streamer vents. and "movmg patients / residents to up in the c!ouds that says. *Mr.
inner roamihallways af possible.*
PMnt See Me. Comley."
"What the hell kmd of a way is that to O.
Comley paysice au this acovity with treat your mother or your granciacer!"
his own money. Sea View is a smad-asks Comley.None of the smart people "that's why it's so gooo*-nursms he is pestermg has answered him yet.
Embargoed for release noon, Thursday, Sept.18.
press contact:
Stephen B. Comley The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 l
WASHINGTON (Sept.18) - Nuclear power plant protest leader Stephen B. Comley has taken to the air to get government leaders to. see "the clear and present threat of these plants and the continuing failure of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)."
"Mr. Reagan, Please See Me - Comley!!!"
i reads the seven-foot letters in the banner trailing an airplane over Washington today. Comley, who has been campaigning on the ground in Washington for a month, wants personally to tell the President of his concerns about nuclear power plants and to present a petition calling for an investigation of the NRC.
The petition was signed by some 1,600 of the 2,200 voters in Comley's hometown of Rowley, Mass. It. also calls for "a moratorium on the startup of any new nuclear plants awaiting licenses" - with an eye to the O
nearly ready Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, 12 miles 6(o O
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE t
9 from Rowley in neighboring New Hampshire.
l
" People Yes, Seabrook-Sununu No" reads the streamer that Comley arranged to have pulled behind an airplane yesterday over New Hampshire's state -
capitol in Concord. John Sununu, the pro-Seabroole l
governor of New Hampshire, is running for his third I
term.
Comley began his air attack Sept.10 with a
" People Yes, Seabrook No" streamer over l
the Massachusetts state capitol in Boston. Mass. Gov.
Michael Dukakis is critical of the Seabrook plant and has met with Comley.
l Comley, married and the father of two sons,17 and 19, has taken time from his running of a nursing home in Rowley to bring to Washington his hometown's concern over Seabrook.
The New Hampshire nuclear power plant has been the object of criticism since its inception more than a
~
decade ago. Cost overruns have resulted in $4.6 billion having been spent so far on the plant, and'it still hasn't been brought on-stream.
Next month, however, hearings on a full-power license for the plant tentatively are scheduled to begin.
Comley hopes to convince President Reagan to act j
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE AC e1 O
so that the NRC won't allow the plant to begin operating. To ~do that, he seeks to bring to the President's attention information about the NRC that,
'Comley says, disqualifies that agency ffom making any further decisions.
"I have a deep respect and loyalty to President Rehgan, but I also feel a great responsibility for the safety of the American people," Comley says. "I have i
talked to people high up in the NRC who feel that the President is not aware 'of what has been happening '
there."
(end)
M e
l O
TCM GRi2OOM EXEC *.JTIVE DIRECTOR O
O
- i September 4, 1986 Mr. Stephen B. Comley Mansion Drive Seavica Retreat Inc.
Rowley, IR 01969
Dear Mr. Comley:
On behalf of Senator Heinz, I am writing to thank you for your outstanding commitment to President Reagan and his Republican Senate Majority through your membership in the National Republican Senatorial Club and the Republican Presidential Task Force.
Your longtime support, as a Permanent Member of the Senatorial Club and as a Charter Member of the Task Force, has been valuable in our battle to maintain control of the U.S. Senate.
We appreciate your exceptional generosity, and we look forward to working with you in the future.
Good luck in all of your future endeavors.
Sincerely, kl /
/f
' %Nat p a:
~
C1drkson Hine Senatorial Committee
{A'f(f
/
.J 440 FIRST STR ECT, N.W. m.SulTE 600
- WAS HINGTON. D.C.200018 3202 347 0202
- 202 224 23S1 O
y
-..w- - -
OV ym"S-
%>gde 8'
6EGhM/
/ ERR mTypitef%#
SHERATON HOTELS INNS AND RESORTS WORLDWIDE S25 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20001-1527 (202) 628-2100 August 12, 1986 Mr. Frederick J. Ryan, Jr.
Dir w n, Praaidantial Armi.,:..a-.:3 and Sclwinling Uhe White House Wnchington, DC
Dear Mr. Ryan:
I rer4LCully request a meeting #ith P:v..sident Reagan either at the end of the Week Or SQnetime during the beginning of next Week. This meeting Will be nore hanafic4al to the Praaidant than it will be to me.
If you need further information please call me at 628-2100, Ext. 1517.
Sincerely, Steven D. Ccaley Rowley, Massachusetts
I
}8 o
i.
~
- .i.T... 3.
- fM
- .
fE -
- 9M E:.-
- 0;
- j;.i
..g.
..,1.
THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON August 15, 1986
.:+.aaxp.i+;;::+.<::::.:=:,:,:..,.u a.>.:.w:
l
Dear Mr. Comley:
In accordance with your telephone conver-
..s. ;;.gp 3;;.;..
sation with my office, I am complying with
-- ~* '
your request to put into writing the fact that due to the heavy demands on the President's schedule before he leaves for California he will be unable to meet with you.
j This is to advise you that the informational packet you sent with your letter has been brought to the attention of'the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Sincerely,
[" ""','7 A
g
-Da22 -r FREDERICK J.
RYAN, JR.
Director, Presidential Appointments and Scheduling O
- Suite 1517
=
Stevea 8-co=1er The-Sheraton Grand 525 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001-1527
o
(
i August 27, 1986 Mr. Frederick J. Ryan, Jr.
Director, Presidential Appointments and Scheduling The White House.
Washington, DC Dear Mr. Ryan 9
Please read the release enclosed.
I plan on returning to Washington this Friday, August 29, 1986.
I certainly think by this time you 'have received correspondence from the Secr.et Service, from Officers Doone and Morris.
It goes without saying that I will be needing to see you next week at your convenience.
Sincerely, nG Stephen B. Comley Rowley, Massachusetts 1
O k
t
O September 4, 1986
~
4 Mr. Frederick Ryan Director, Presidential
~
Appointments and Scheduling' The White House Washington, DC i
Dear Mr. Ryan:
I understand that you have been away with the Pres'ident but have since returned.
. Referring back to the letter of August 12th,. I can just reiterate that it is imperative that I meet with the President.
As you know, I am in Washington to meet with the President because he is the only one who has veto power over the'NRC.
I have a deep respect and loyalty to President Reagan but I also feel a great responsibility for the safety of the American people.
I have talked to people high up in the NRC who feel that the President is not aware of what has been happening at the NRC.
I have been in touch with Mr. Laxalt's office and expect to be meeting with him next week regarding this matter.
You might also talk to Clarkson Hinds at the Republican Task Force with whom I have been in touch with for the last month and a half.
I suggest that you reread my press releases and you will better understand my position.
Respectfully, g
- ~ ~
Stephen B. Comley Rowley, Massachusetts O
sacto =re-q9
. \\
i
REASONS FOR PRESS TO DO MORE ON STORY 1.
My opinions after talking to:
A.
Mr. Asselstine:
He has been known as maverick, very i
controversial.
What if he is telling the truth?
'Titu &n. xit or cts Ler-j
//cLP // /r)
B.
Other NRC officers higher up: saying same things privately to me.
C.
Markey's people:
privately told me that the NRC has a conflict of interest with the industry.
D.
Even to the people of the press, T.V.,
radio and newspapers, it's obvious that the industry is running 4
~
the NRC.
I have been told that information has been suppressed and people have been discouraged from investigation.
E.
Industry reaction:
1.
In the June issue of Nuclear Industry (pp.21) I quoted,but they didn't mention my name.
" Russian Roulette."
2.
Mr. Campbell of the Massachusetts Voice of Energy is obviously concerned.
He spent two hours on the phone with my wife and sent me enough material to
{
keep me busy for a year.
Why not call him to see what he thinks?
2.
Incident v ith Secret Service - September 21, 1986".
3.
Time Magazine - doing story - Joelle Attinger (617) 262-7551 could call and confirm she is recommending story.
4.
After meeting with Associated Press, United Press International and Globe, they did do some blurbs and excerpts on the story.
5.
I have gathered other material since meeting with Asselstine l
which incriminates the NRC pertaining to conflicts of interest at the NRC.
( ) G.
Why haven't other people been opening up until now?
Job security.
They're afraid of losing their jobs.
They don't want to rock the boat.
A high official in the NRC_has already got demoted by a chairman who has since retired, who gave assurances that that would not happen.
The feeling has
~
been by employees who know what is going on and have had personal experiences'in material that has been handed down 7,{
tto investigators, they have been discouraged because it T
c:)
1 awaiting licenses.
They know from previous experience because of fellow employees being demoted that if they come forward that they will also be in danger of being demoted or fired and have been told that you being a nuclear engineer and have no future but to eventually work within the industry when you get through with your federal job.
So don't do anything that would jeopardize licensing of a nuclear plant because the industry will never hire you in the future.
7.
Why are these people talking to me?
They told me that they could identify with our situation in Rowley.
They also have kids and they would want a say in the evacuation plan, too.
They could identify with the nursing home situation and maybe their own parents could be in that situation.
They also know what's going on and they know what's right and their conscience is bothering them especially given the Chernobyl incident and there is a good chance it could happen here anytime.
They're also losing patience with their leadership that is not representing them the way that they want.
t t
6 O
i
~?
4C
.o l
Analyzino Mr. Asseltine's answer to Mr. Walske's letter.
\\
1.
Refer to my question #8.
"Do you feel that people are really informed about and know of the dangers of nuclear power?
ANSWER:
"I am not convinced that the public is fully informed of the risk of nuclear power....As I noted in my letter, I do not believe that we fully understand that risk, and we should not be afraid to say so."
a.
Asseltine says incident can happen here in the next twenty years.
Which also. means it can happen today, due to human error.and improper contruction.
b.
It could be worse that what happened at-Chernobyl.
He cites these reasons in the letter to Walske, dated 7-15-86.
(p.1)
....In particular, you point to my statement that
...given the present level of safety being achieved by the operating nuclear power plants in this country, we can expect to see a core meltdown accident with the next 20 years, and it is possible that such an accident could result in off-site releases of radiation which are as large.as, or larger.than, the releases estimated to have occurred at Chernobyl..."
(p.2)
....Most plants are making moderate, not extensive, use of their in-house operating experience, and in general are making less use of the large body of knowledge associated with events and concerns that
. originate elsewhere in the industry.-
(See, "1985 Annual Report /AEOD S601," April 1986, p.5.)
This reinforces a previous AEOD report which found that our licenses often repeat the same mistakes, even at the same plant.
The actual operating experience of our existing plants and the industry's failure to heed the lessons of experience indicate, in my judgement, that we can expect to see another serious accident in.this country during the next 20 years....
(p.7)
....The industry itself must become more aggressive in ensuring exemplary performance of all O
nuclear utilities.
After all, the future of the best managed facility may rest in the hands of the worst managed....
2.
Refer to Question #9.
" Cost versus other fuels - obsolete?
f9 P1 ants in this country are not best built.
Seabrook has
'+
4D n
V a.
The lack of standardization.
(p.5)
The Commission's regulations focus on health and safety considerations rather than on the overall cost of nuclear power....The cost of operating and maintaining the older existing has also increased significantly over the past 'several years.
Although there are many reasons for the cost increases, among the more significant are poor managment of plant construction, the lack of standardization, a design-as-you-build approach to plant construction....Whether nuclear powar remains competitive with other alternatives is difficult to say.
It appears, however, that due to a ' combination of factors, including reduced demand for electricity, financial conditions, and uncertainty about costs and safety requirements, that no U.S.
utility at the present time is prepared to commit to build a new nuclear powerplant'.
b.
Also, no future so industry has realized tht because of Chernobyl and safety pressures from the public that this is not a viable industry for them.
So they have not applied for any new licenses and will do and say anything to license their remaining plants left to be open at the expense of the American people.
3.
It's obvious to me that Mr. Asselstine had tried to tell the real story.
Refer to question #6 "Do you feel that the NRC has represented the people as well it has represented the nuclear industry?"
as
".... the NRC has acted more as the protector of the nuclear industry than the protector of the public....For the most part, I am the only member of the current Commission who has opposed these actions: however, one other Commissioner has opposed the backfit rule.... If given the proper policy direction from the top, I am confident that the agency could pursue its regulatory responsibilities in a manner that would restore public confidence in the NRC as an objective and fair regulator that puts the interests of the public foremost...."
% 4.
Refer to question #14 "Do you feel that the public would be justified in believing that the NRC is not acting in the public's best interest?"
....As I noted in my response to question 6, I believe there are some significant Commission decisions in recent
, years in which the Commission has acted more as the eprotector of the industry than the protector of the public.
)_-
I In such cases, I believe that the public would be insti fi ed
/
f' 1E best interests.
a.
Letter from Wlaske saying that Mr. Asseltine did not know the implications.
Boston Globe, Thursday, August 21,.1986 states, "A top US Nuclear Regulatory Commission official has repeated i
that the federal agency will not stand in the way of low-power testing at the Seabrook, N.H.,
nuclear power plant, even though the plant has no emergency evacuation plans.
5.
Refer to question #5.
"I understand that the low level licensing requirements have been reduce 4,d as they pertain to issues of evacuation problems that may arise in a city or town.
This change has enabled questions not be resolved before a license is issued.
Given the Chernobyl incident and the' problems and questions that surround the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plymouth (which has been branded "the worst-run plant in the US"), do you think we should reverse again and require that i
evaluation issues be resolved before a low level license is granted to any new plants?
....However, our staff advises that the situation at Chernobyl was quite different because the plant had been operating at higher power levels for some time, with the consequent build-up of fission products and decay heat.
I should note that I opposed issuance of a low-power operating license for the Shoreham plant on the ground that there appeared to exist an outstanding e.nergency planning issue which might prevent that plant from ever going into full power operation.
In the circumstances cf that case, it seemed to me unwise to contaminate the plant until the Commission had' resolved the outstanding emergency planning issues....But my decision in Shoreham turned on the wisdom s
of contaminating a plant that might never receive a full-power operating license and not on the risk to the public of low power operation."
It is my contention that the Seabrook plant is in a location that i
chould not have been built and that was told to me from higher ups.
Question #12 "What are the differences between the Russian i O' plants and our nuclear plants as you see them?
"I do not believe that we have enough detailed design information about the Chernobyl plant to fully understand their design or the significance of the differences between their design philosophy andours....Some broad' lessons with j
l applicability to the U.S.
nuclear program.
One of these is g{
i the unacceptability of a severe accident here and the need I
.O accident from occurring and to limitlarge offsite re u
one occur....
Question #4 - As we have yet information on Chernobyl, whatto receive all of the the radius from 10 miles to 2 mileare your opinions on reducing s.
"You are quite correct that i
information needed on the Chernobyl a we have yet received all of the potential impact on emergency planningccident to assess its the Chernobyl accident may well EPZ 1arge enough and should we considplannin the past three years,
- that is,. is the 10 mile the U.S.
er expanding it?
advocated reductions in the radioactivenuclear industry has Over estimates of the amounts and types of radi source term (the which could be released during a seri oactive materials The American Physical Society and ous nuclear. accident).
sound scientific basis for annumber of areas wh They have advised that acrossy source term reassesmentneeded to provide a
[
source term are.not yet justified,the-board reductions in the not yet taken action to reduce thenumerical reductions are F
The commission has p
technical ' staff has advised thatsource terms, and our f
reductions in emergency planning zones arany across-the-board 1ccently the industry is advocati e premature.
Evacuation issue refer to Questiong a 10 mile radius to 2 miles.
1 n #2 rovido evacuation for everybody. feel it is very irresponsible n ustry not be made to
" Evacuation issue people who can't b some means should be provided for ' people wh e moved... Do you feel
- moved, other than merely being sheltered?" o cannot be Answer:
I am not aware that include sheltering, but fsquarely by the commission in any previouthi situations evacuation may.or at least some accidents case....These can the people within the EPZ. be necessary for some or all of maasures have been required to include nemergency planning
- Thus, transportation, avacuate themselves....However,particularly for tiiose who are unable to eeded mmission has faced the situation in whi hI do not believe t mpossible for some individuals within the EPZ c
lternative is sheltering within unprotect devacuation is and the only facilities.
e t
'i
- - ~
~~
September 10, 1986 To The Editor:
(
I feel I had been patient with Governor Dukakis and other electe llhfficialsinthisstate,waitingforthemtotakedeliberateactionre-Arding the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant.
However, when I sensed that N
I was getting nowhere waiting, I chose to take a trip to Washington, 2
D.C. to find out more about the nuclear industry and the Nuclear Reg-
'/
ulatory Commission (NRC).
Some of the disturbing things I found are:
(A.)
One of the main goals of the NRC is to have nuclear power plants awaiting licensure, including the Seabrook Power Plant and the Shoreham Plant in Long Island, New York, receive permission to load f
fuel and begin testing at 5% capacity.
This has already happended with
/
the Shoreham Plant.
Onceachieved,admittedahigh-levelofficial'of'.thdJ('
NRC, a " brown-out" in the area of the plant would be arranged.
The
/
v goal is to make the public uncomfortable by the lack of electricity -
which could_ include no heat or air conditioning and no electrical appliances - so that they are suckered into believing that the plant is necessary for power production.
The plant would be already contam-insted, as Shoreham is, thereby rendering it useless to produce energy by another sources, such as natural gas.
(B.)
A high official of the NRC is being reviewed for possible indictment by the Department of Justice for known wrong-doings within the NRC.
However, this person was voted to be retained, by a 3-2 vote /
within NRC offices, in my opinion to manipulate and suppress infor-mation in order to get plants running at 5% capacity.
(C.)
Mr. James Asseltine, a NRC Commissioner, has been called a maverick and a controversial man by some nuclear proponents and others.
However, an interview with Mr. Asseltine revealed enough information to assure the citizens of the United States that we will have a major nuclear disaster within the next 20 years unless major changes are made in our nuclear power plants now.
This information comes from a
~
mnmber of the NRC!
Can we take the chance and dismiss his charges or start to believe this man?
We should act now, and demand that overyone act, to prevent such an accident from occuring in our lifetimes.
I personally am ashamed that none, except a very few, of our own state and local officials have stood up to represent us in this issue.
Officials in Washington admit that our state leaders are " fence-sitters".
It is obvious that Chernobyl has to happen in their backyards for them to wake up.
We have petitioned them to do something about this issue, yet they haven't acted in our behalf.
All the disturbing news and infor-mation I obtained in Washington is readily available to them - if they work as I did to find it.
I find this " fence-sitting" intolerable.
I asked Governor Dukakis and other state agencies on June 27d1 to respond about the evacuation of sheltered people in the event of a nuclear acci-dent.
They have yet to reply.
This is an issue that Mr. Assletine ad-mitted was never faced squarely by the NRC.
He feels it is a very important issue!
The nuclear issue is the most important issue our
/~%
%)
CONTINUED
?
l O
.lected officials will face while in office and is a common sense issue.
Whatever the Governor will choose to do, he should have done it sooner.
)
The hearings on the Seabrook Power Plant will begin on September 29th.
It seems to me that should he have acted sooner, he could have had more of an impact at those. hearings.
I feel it is time for them to m:ot these issues. head on and do something about them.
In the United States, where we are guaranteed freedon of speech and freedom of choice, how can they sit back while there is open i
supppression of information at the NRC, whose primary goal has become to open nuclear power plants, not protect the citizens of our country?
l Sincerely, I
l
.d.
Stephen B. Comley l
St' phen B. Comley e
Mansion Drive Rowley, MASS 01969 (617) 948-2552 O
9l i
CONTENTS Ci' INFORMATIONAL" PACKET (1)
Booklet entitled:
" Radiological Emergency Responce Plan" Note especially the second page, #11.
This statement is very important to us, not only because our residents go to Anna Jaques Hospital (within the 10 mile radius), but because the evacuation plan do not provide for anyone, young or old, that is infirmed in the hospital - this could be you or me!
(2)
Letter to Governor Michael Dukakis from Stephen B. Comley written on June 27, 1986.
P (3)
Sea View Statement (4)
Newspaper clippings from the Newburyport Daily News dat'ed Monday, July 21, 1986 and T,uesday, July 22, 1986.
(5)
Newspaper clippings from the North Shore Weeklies - Ipswich Chronicle dated Thursday, July 24, 1986.
(6)
Letter to the Editor of the Newburyport Daily News from Stephen B. Comley (7).
Letter to the Editor of the North Shore Weeklies - Ipswich Chronicle from Stephen B. Comley.
(8)
Update on meeting with the Town of Rowley Board of Selectmen dated Monday, July 28, 1986.
l (9)
Letter to the Honorable Francis X.
Bellotti from the Rowley Board 1
of Selectmen dated July 25, 1986.
(10) Letters to the Editor of the Newburyport Daily News from Aldene Gordon and Mary E.
- Mishill, R.N.,
Director of Nursing at Sea View Nursing Home in Rowley.
(11) Letter to President Ronald Reagan from Stephen B. Comley (12)
Iatter to President fran Allan Squires, M.D.
Pesident of Sea View Nursina Hane gj s
21 k
~
[.. '
g
' N.
~
TIIIf'DNLY XEWS:
I Xewburyport, Massachusen
.t 35 cents
$1.50 weeklyhome delivered '}
N 4') Pages Friday, August 8,1966
\\
.y Rowley man taking> case.
against Seabrook to D.C.
lie said he expects to stay in which he said'was also attended '
By ANN CARRNS Washington for a week.
by Selectraen Gary llanson and Daily News staff Yesterday afternoon, Comley Carl Dasch and Rep. Thomas Pa-and local representatives hand-lumbo and Sen. Robert Buell.
ROWLEY - The organizer of a delivered a petition to Gov. Mi-The appointment was arranged pettrion asking President Reagan chael Dukakis asking that Rowley' on short notice by Palumbo and to delay licensing of the Seabrook' be included in evacuation plans Buell, Comley said.
N.II., nuclear power plant is tak-for the plant.
The petition to President Rea-ing hts case to Washington.
htore than 2,000 people signed gan asks the president to urge a Stephen Comley of Mansion the petition, Comley said..
moratorium 'on all new nuclear Drive, an administrator at Sea-The NRC requires Dukakis to plant licenses until more informa.
view nursing home, said he will fly submit evacuation plans for all tion on the accident at the Cherno-to Washington Sunday and meet Massachusetts communities with-byl nuclear plant.in the Soviet Monday morning with aldes to in a 10-mile radius of the Sea-Union is available.
Sen. Paul I.axalt, R Nev., in an brook, N.II., nuclear plant.
The letter also asks Reagan to -
attempt to get a meeting with the Rowley f alls outside the radius, make the Nuclear Regulatory '
president.
but its students attend the Triton Commission considers Rowley's Comley said he is flying to. Regional Schoot District in neigh-concerns about Scabrook.
. Washington at his own expense for boring Newbury, which falls with-More than 1,500 Rowley resi '
the sole purpose of seeking a in the 10-mite evacuation wne.
dents of all ages have signed the '
meeting with iteagan to " update Comley said Dukakis did not petition, Cor. ley said.
the president on what is happen-Indicate support or opposition to
""leagan) has got to want to ing in Rowley."
the petition during the meeting, knus about this," Comley said.
w
Vol.113, No. 32 3 sections, i4 8 Pegas a inJ t,,49,,su u.,5 4,
.c.,,,
s g,
r e,,-
.ad
" w-a V
.-1:w.=.gnhMMM.w.m=mseen i.t..d.
.d
- s
.w
- m.,. w... e;9.L.m. PE~:-{ j'~3 T.W,-VS.G32g.@
...e.m.g m.a m - w. m.. m t *j; r
i.
dij M
i F.T._ h' e= y =._.- j-r s
O 4
z = - e._ m. r a_._ m.,. %.,,.,
~ 3 q,
Q SiPRDekammmir4th!Was, f
~
U
.[
j BECAllSE VE CARE 4 6 3k, =nw
.?,
WMg 3 J ii g
- 3:yfjm g #[h.,M-,i [%. d,l'd l
y j
., " J.
b.
D
_ _ ___ M. _t e.
- u..
s
$w,}. g9 G.l.f f. " 1
- c% j m c y
.,p, y
_ m. -
r..
43 T-n--
(1T
/9 e
A
.c.
.9 W
., e 4,9 7
i I"
N =l mm-e p
Idd?
f
- g 3$
~,merosao.m
/.
wam 4.,...o_7..
r 3,.
=r 2
T
- - g - y
- h..,
$?
h
== " "
e..,t
~
't
.?.( f C
0.'-}
p.
,;e.
~
- p
' i
'A, 'O
-Ni!i?.n
[,, _
- s y
=
- 4 h
- !.
- E.I.(
,r,
- A NEW SIGN was putin place this week to mark plans.Ted Fyrberg posed beneath the sign before ' li
,q t
pj f the headquarters for a second petition drive by heading out to collect signatures,' Friday aner. 'M
, David Trueblood phot,olf 'l
(
y
- i. those opposed to Seabrook emergency evacuation noon.
i t
t ge b
i-Pighting Seabrook s.,.,.
g-p
..g t,
? J 800-sign seconc: aetit,io.w P
'n
,,e er q
/
l, s
l-l By DAVID TRUEBI,00D are for or against nuclear power " '
Also, he criticized the plan be -
For the second timein two weeks, said Comley, who organized the i ld
?
i.; 8.a petition has circulated through ' first petitiondrive,also."We (just) 3. causeitd
.s Ing and hospital patients.
i*
Rowley to collect signatures from want to have a say in this town as.
The RadiologicalEmergency Re -
I,*
- residents who oppose current far as that plant is concerned.
. sponse Plan for the city of New.'
g emergency plans proposed for the "We are not going to stop," he I buryport, he said, states that, "
, J' S,eabrook nuclest power plant.
said, "until we get it."
"Only those hospital patients and The first petition was directed to.
The first drive for signatures, he : nursing home residents who are.
3
- g.
, the Board of Selectmen.The second said, collected 60 percent of all the ' deemed medically safe to move are le petition is directed to Presic'ent registered voters in the town. This i to be evacuated." -
So now," wrote Comley, in re..
!T.. Ronald Reagan, and the Nuclear time,hesaid,thegoalistocollect80l sp"onse to that plan, "if there 4'
Regulatory Commission.
percent.
f
~ A meeting at the First Congrega.
Comley has strongly criticized nuclear disaster,everyone who can tional Church on Main Street last the current evacuation plan prop-get to the buses and cars and can i-p-
Thursday marked the begining of osed for Seabrook, which includes run when the siren goes off, good.
A the second petition drive,which eol-orily communities within 10 miles of luck, and the strong survive."
O
.I,, lected more than 1,800 local names the nuclear power plant.
"If everyone can't be evacu.
3 Ile has pointed out that high ated," said Comley, who manages j
, in five days.?
"We have a tremendous opper ' school students from Hov> ley who the Sea View Nursing flome on ~
tunity here in Rowley," Stephen attend Triton RegionalIfigh Schoo! Mansion Drive, "to my mind. that
+-
Comley said at the Thursday night would be separated from their is discrimination. That's illegal, meeting. "We can show the presl. families and evacuated in the event That's un.American."
y'
, ' dent how we really feel about this of an emergency, because the, Ile pointed to the strength of the
lasue.
lls in Newbury, within the 10 ~ opposition that people in the town
, nf*The ques. tion Is not whetheryou, schoo mile limit.
c.ausved es Pase se f,
p o.
e
}
- ~ ' ' ~
. 'h,k
+
~
-~
. r A m I,
v r
.w.s-D,
- o cion' vo rrie, -
s....._.,.._ __....Seab~ rook accide n: w m m
~
s'abou".a..s
- .c:... :n
. ;... c>
ltdown and explosion Butto getback to the nearby nuc.
.n. To the Editori'
,g.pm,.g,.:
.a reactor mecaused untold death and suffering lear plant. It appears that a so g
g3
' AsaresidentofSeaViewNursing and raised the prospect of long. called 10 mile radius has been Home andaretiredphysician.Iam term health and er.vironmental established.which includes part of I' Rowley.We believe that all of Row. "
O,.,,,
concerned about a possible nuclear damage on a far greater scale than ley (shou'i be included) accident at Seabrook. New Hamp. anything yet unleashed by peaceful 15-20 mile radius (should) be est
.Ishire As accident similar to the
. accident at Three hille Island. Pa... nuclear use." (Time Magazine.. - lished. -
, / : '.
' p
~ -ra s.;. --
May 12)
What has happened to.the Civil e I
" and recently at Chernobyl.U.S.S.R.
~
~
~
We have residents here. along What happens to one's body? Defense persons? They,had many 7
~
with the lame, the halt and the Thyroid. lung, breast. liver and kid-places set upin basements of manv
. blind.Forsome ofus theinexorable.ney - cancer. Brain - cerebral stores and dwellings se've 3j*
syndrome fatal after acute radia-ago.
' law of nature will soon take its toi. tion. Head - cataracts and loss of What about the nursing homes' O
1...and other residents will come to hair after low exposure. Reproduc. We know that the admimstration.
(0 take our place. Nevertheless, we
'are now profoundly concerned ab. 'tive organs - genetic abnormal. our nurses and aides are wonderful out the pcssible radiation fall.out ties. Intestines walls are des, and very dedicated persons. Really bO from anearby nuclearpowerplant, troyed by large doses of radiation, very personable persons. They We mustremindourselvesthatat etc..etc.
would have the burden of (giving!
theChernobyinuclear plant began.
President Reagan in his Sunday help, aid and assistance to many of 7,
by far. the gravest crisis in the trou. address declared: "The Soviets our residents.
-y bled history of commercial atomic owe the world an explanation, A full Trains could be used to carry to C
' power.
accounting of what happened at safety. also buses and amb"lw"
~
"A catastrophe had occurred Chernobyl and what is happening Allen N. Souires
~
~
resident over the weekend at the Chernobyl now is the least the world commun.
Sea View Nursing Home
- plant.80 miles north of Kiev.where ity has a right to expect."
m eam._
p
. N.
Aece w nJ N
/7..
es M 4
~
em.pe m
o N
W.
I 8
d
o
....y
...~. c...
g
(
l
[
- .A
~,.r... SeSIC eniS OSK R60QQn 1 O GC C reSS u
~
s e
i g
k %eir16ncd~rnS abouf.Seabrook 2,.
- c..,.
f[.4'.h! ore than'1,800 Rowley' residents NuclearPowerPlantthatislocated '"only those 7 1 have signed a petition, asking Pres. InSeabrook,New Hampsire,butin-nursing home residents co volves.various towns in Mas-deemed medically safe to move are f 7 ident Reagan to address their con-sachusetts because' of the 10 mile. tobe evacuated.Those patientstre-cerns about the Seabrook nuclear sidents which cannot be evacuated
.N %
radius.
w power plant.
e reasons for our concerns are should be sheltered in place."
.s It will be talen to Washington, th In our opinion, this not only
.J D.C.,later in the week by petition affects nursing home and hospital A. Our ' hildren live two miles residents, but it could affect anyone j
organizer Stephen Comley, who c
plans to giveit to President Ronald outside the ten mile radius but who had an operation andhad to be o
t-Reagan.
attend a regional school inside the sheltered in place that day.,
ten mile radius. We have been told J'
. This is the petition:
that we cannot be part of the eva-C. We feel that the Nuc!' ear Reg-d
. We, the citizens of Rowley, Mas-cuation planrung.This,also apphes ulatoryCommissionhas been negli-sachusetts, appeal to you, Ronald totheresidentsofSeaViewNursmg gent in not making themselves d
b
' Reagan,thePresidentoftheUnited States, to address the following con. H,ome who are trar.sferred to a hos-available and not pital located instde the ten ' mile up on the issues in our' town. It 3
cerns and recommendations that radius.
seems that they have represented we, the undersigned,have, regard, B. Regarding the Radiological the nuclear industry very well, but
- q3 c.,
ing the Nuclear Regulatory Com. Emergency Response Plan. Draft they have not encouraged theinp g
mission,a Federal Agencythathasthe ability to license the Seabrook %156, Attach Condaued on Page 30
~
u:(
s Res.,ic ents. as< Reagan 1
"o acc ress he.ir concerns
' Continued and we can be assured that we have of the people that may not be for the full information back from ~
, nuclear power or have concerns for Chernobyl to make a. responsible
. decision to whether we should con '.
safety in our area.
Thus, we the citizens of Rowley, tinue rhminng that nuclear poweris Massachusetts recommend:,
, a safe alternative.. -
.. A'Titat you set up a commission C. That you remind the Nuclear Regulatory Commisssion that this to see if the Nuclear Regulatory is America, not Russia and they Commission is acting responsibly are hired by the people and are -
in representing and saymg that the accountable to the people, not just safetyandconcerns are beingprop, the people in the nuclear indust r.
erly addressed for the people of
.We were reminded on the 4., w Rowley as wellas people across this. July of what this cuntry was found.
country.s.,,,,.,..,y
,.. '. --7 ed for and we thank you for that. We r
B.Thatyou ask for a moratorium are seeing that our freedom of
- on the start up of any new nuclear speech and freedom of choice is being exercised.
l plants awaiting licenses until you_
l
t0f n
v
.... --i
" LETTERS' Concern for safety of nursing home residen../ts
.? -To the editor:
o The people who need help and support and should be I would like to address the issue regarding nuclear evacuated first, have been forgotten, as'well as the evacuation planning as it relates to nursing homes.
' people who are expected to give a show of hands on I
This is also in response to a letter by Thomas who is going to stay and take care of these people. I Moughan of Amesbury, in which he states that only think the people we should be critiot'ing the most are z
those hospital patients and nursing home residents the Nuclear Regulatory Commissiori which is our who are deemed medically safe to move are to be own Federal Regulatory Department responsible for evacuated. 'It!s also means that if anyone were the licensing of the nuclear industry. Their irrespon-operated on in the hospital and were deemed medi-sible, inhumane attitude is deplorable. I, understand cally unfit to be moved that day, they would also be in that we have a new Chairman o t the Nuclear Regula-this category.
tory Commission as of June 30,1986. This is a good My family has operated Sea View Nursing IIome time to clean house, Mr. Chairman, and chan in Rowley for over 30 years. Our philosophy has attitudes or resign yourself.
always been to represent our elders and provide the We feel very fortunate that Seabrook Station has finest care possible. I don't know of any other profes-not been activated yet, especially where this safety sion regulated as much as nursing homes, but when issue has not been addressed or planned. If we have we are caring for our elders, we should be highly an altertiative to our energy problem that cannot regulated.
accommodate an evacuation plan that will provide We are also not unfamiliar with evacuation plans. for everyone, then I do not believe that we should We are required to have evacuation plans in place have this kind of power.
that pertain to loss of power and fire. On the issue of la representing the staff and residents of Sea View nuclear disaster, however, we have not been notified Nursing Home, let it be known that all our resi or given any guidelines.
will be provided for in any evacuation.
We nott!!ed Governor Dukakis in writing on June It is very important that we assure our residents 27th and have been in touch with his office by phone. that we will continue to work in their best interests. I
.We have been told that he will be addressing this think that my fellow professionals in nursmg homes
. Issue. Being a member of the Massachusetts Federa-and hospitals certainly think the same way, and that tion of Nursing Homes, we have asked them, also, to we all will continue to assure all our residents that.
address thisissue.
this is not a negotiable issue and we will not stand for I feel now the plants were put up without properly it. 'Ve at Sea View are of the opinion that this is not i
addressing the safety issue and the concerns of our only deplorable, but un-American!
people.
So now, if there is a nuclear disaster, everyone STEPHEN B. COMLEY :
Administrator who can get to the buses and cars and can run when Sea View Nursing Home the siren goes off, good luck and the strong survive.
Rowley
, c.
. i o
i 7
f I
t
~g O
4;1974 o
N i
/
. ~.
n.n.,--..--
- FightingYSeabrook~ >
.i.
...... ~.
~
u.2__:.m. f.
ll wou c ra..;._ m c...
'l mer co to amos acain u,
e
...... % :/
.y By DAVID TRUEBLOOD we probably would not be sitting "It's an engineer's delight," Fyr.
Ted Fyrberr is convinced the here today," he said.
berg said, of the power plant at nuclear power station at Seabrook,
' Look at Chernobyl," he said. "I Seabrook. "It's an erigineer's de.
N.H.,shouldbe closedbeforeit pro-am sure those people didn't do that light with a monster inside."
duces one kilowatt of commer' cial on purpose. It's like Three Mile Is.
ThatSeabrookis expected to cost power. The Main Street resident land - accidents can happen.
15 billion by next spring, when com. ',
feels so strongly about the issue "I worked in the power industry pany spokesmensayit willbe that he spent much oflast weekend for 19 years, and I know that we produce commercial power, gin to does co!!ecting signatures door to door to have to'have an electrified world. not count for much with Fyrberg.
persuade the Board ofSelectmen to Electricity - it's one of man's Many have said it represents too protest the ptant to Massachusetts greatest slaves, but they should much money to throwaway.he ack.
. Gov. Michael S. Dukakis.
have been exploring other ways to nowledged, but he fears paying a
" Man strives forperfection,butit make it.
price that dwarfs the cost of con.
doesn't work out that way," said "The factis,thereis nothing to do struction.
Fyrberg. "And one accident in 100 with the waste (a nuclear plant pro-years is too much. You have got en. duces). Not a state in the' country
.'I am willing to buy them out "
cased in that plant, once it starts, a willtakeon thatwaste.Why keep on he said, "to amortize the cost of th'e '
lethal product, no mistake. If the building up something that is plant over a period of 100 years.
wind is right,it would take out this lethal? People should be told the Everyone could pay a little some-whole coast.I don't think we should truth. If that stuff gets out, we won't thing each month on their bill (to
- have to live with that hanging over be able to live in our homes. What pay one cost of the plantJ our heads.
would we come back for?
"I would rather go to lamps "We are going down the wrong
'"Iknow we need power. I worked again." he said. "I really would."
road," he said, referring to nuclear for (the) Ipswich Power Company By the Monday night meeting of power. "This is very similar to the for 19 years. I know the needs. I the Boardo(Selectmen.the petition road we took with DDT."
know power. I know the complaints drive, of which Fyrberg was a He noted that in the case of the people make when they go to the member, had collected 1,479 pesticide.now banned, experts also switch and the power isn't there. names. including the names of 868
. claimed that no problems would re. Buttherearemanywaysto getitIf registered Rowley voters, accord.
sult from its use. "Had we kept on "allthesebright,youngpeoplewould ing to Stephen Comiey, wbo the way we were going with DDT, put their minds together.
directed the effort.
=
f l
h O
('T d* "~ ~ *ca/
Ar
~
I i
'/
p pl o ri CI,.IEDNL MWS
..a.
.i.; f~.+.., ' c,..-c., '
. 4 ;
r u.a.
- i., r.
v
?, s..".r e e. wn e....wou1y.301n,X..assaenuse: s
.,,.y t
i,,
o,-
.~M ' ' -Monday, August 4,1986 35 cents 31.50 weekly home delivered
%. _-@c-:.
?
12 Pages K..
e
~--
~^*,**'-=%
s q
'Nobisar foes'petitiori president d other Massachusetts communities.
The group also sponsored two other By ANN CARRNS Daily News staff The group set up a booth on Inn petitions, which were each signed by Street in Newburyport for three days about 2,500 people. One asks the Nu-Area residents are appealing to during the city's Yankee Homecoming clear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
President Ronald Reagan for help in festival to collect signatures. Organizer to overturn its recent ruling on the th:ir fight against the Seabrook, N.H.,
Ingrid Sanborn of West Newbury said licensing of the nuclear plant in Shore-nucl:ar powerplant.
Citizens will try to arrange for a Massa-ham, N.Y.
chusetts congressman to hand-deliver
. The NRC ruled that local participa-Approximately 5,000 people signed the petition to Reagan.
tion in evacuation planning is not nec-petitions over the past four days in "1 guess we're feeling that (Reagan) essary in order for the agency to Novburyport and Rowley asking Rea-is not seeing the people's point of.lleense nuclearpowerplants.
gan to stop or delay the plant's view," she said.
The third petition asks the NRC to Licensing.
"We, the undersigned, urge you to
. About 4,000 residents and visitors help prevent the licensing of the Sea. oppose !! censing of Seabrook because signed a petition addressed to Reagan brook, New Hampshire, nuclear power of the plant's location in a densely sponsored by Citizens Within a Ten-plant as a nuclear energy facility," the Populated area.
Mile Radius, coordinator Thomas petition says.
"If last weekend's result is any indi.
Moughan said.
Many signers were from outside the cation, people do not want nuclear Th2 anti-Seabrook group takes its evacuation area but all were "v'ery Plants anywhere," said Moughan.
name from the federally-designated much aware of the Seabrook issue and In Rowley, which lies outside the 10-evacuation zone around the plant,- willing to support our cause," Sanborn mile zone, about t,000 residents signed which includes Newburyport and five said.
petition, page A12 r
e
- .y
.....,s, PETITION: T ucLearioes acaea' to leagan Continued ffompage Al "It seems that they have repre-The NRC requires Dukakis to -
.a petitiori asking sented the nuclear industry very submit evacuation plans for all,
President iteagan to make sure well but they have not encouraged Massachusetts commumties with-the NRC considers Rowley's con. the input of the people that may in a 10-mile radius of the Seabrook Rowley falls outside of the 10 j
..e plant.
'cerns about Seabrook, organizer not be for nuclear power or have Jitephen Comley said.
concerns for safety in our area."
Comley said 60 volunteers gath.
Comley said he plans to fly to mile zone, but students in the town ered the signatures door to door Washington to make sure the attend school in neighbormg New-l and in local stores. The signatures President receives the petition.
'. bury, which is withm the evacua-I include some signed by parents on "I want it to get to tha prest. tion radius.
behalf of theirchildren,hesaid.-
dent's desk," Comley said. "I Residents of Georgetown, an-J.
'The petition asks Reagan to - think (the petition) is a good ind1* other town outside the evacuation
- urge a moratorium on new nu. cation of,how people feel across zone, are collecting signatures on '
clear plant licenses until more in. America.
a similar petition' formation is available about the The petition is the second one disaster at the Chernobyl power signed by Rowley residents re-Comley, who also organized the plant in the Soviet Union.
. garding the Seabrook plant.
.. first Rowley petition, said he is,
"We feel that the Nuclear Regu.
Two weeks ago, about 1,400 peo-waiting for an appointment from latory Commission has been negil-pie signed a petition which suc-the 'governer's office in order to gent in not making tht.mselves cessfully asked the Board of hand-deliver the petition. A bus '
available and not calling us or Selectmen to ask Gov. Michael S.
load of residents wtll travel to I being up on the issues in-ovr Dukakis to include Rowley in eva-Boston to present the petition. he eu,ef nn nh- % o,. ne,,
,, u
m.mmo.o-ogvou gy u.
Seabrook:ni'ak"ng own evacuation @ Plan m
- . t. '
r;.
wg;
- 3
..n w
h SEABROOK, N.II. (AP) - Seabrook f "If the plant is really as' safe as we draw up a plan.
Illustrate how a utility-sponsored plan. -
nucle:r plant officials are mapping a believe it is... It's possible that as you Massachusetts Gov. Michael Duka- ' might differ from a state-sponsored detour tround an emergency planning move away from the plant the Intensity kis has delayed filing an emergency one. 'Ihe utility plan would consider roadblock that threatens to delay plant -lof the emergency response doesn't plan for the six communities, saying he sending a " traffic gulde" to an inter-licensing by taking emergency evacua,' have to be what it was thought to have has too many unanswered safety"section to direct
- traffic in an
'M tion plrns for nearby Massachusetts-been when the current rules were put questions.
emergency.
c:mmunities Into their own hands. ' ' ' t Into place in 1980," he sald.
Workondevelopingutility-sponsored '
If a police officer shows up, as the i
"At the same time, the plant wants the lie would not say whether the com-emergency plans got a boost last week';NRC anticipates, '"the ' traffic guide',
gov rnment to review updated plant-pany would seek a reduction in the 10 when the NRC said its appeals board would turn over the responsibility of
~,'
s s fetyinform tioninhopesof gettinga mile emergency zone.
would havetoconsideraplandrawnup, that intersection to' the law enforce-',.
break cn th required emergency *
"We have not ashed for'any byShoreham'sowners. ' '
ment officer, after explaining exactly
?
i
' ' changes," he said, repeating that plant Derrickson and consultant William why it is laid out theyay it is, Renz pt ns.
j
~
t "Wa have requested this review be " managers are asking only for the NRC Renz gave few specifics, but said a key,'said.
1 c*use wa believe there is a basis for to review updated safety information factor is the assumption in the NRC At the same news conferen'ce, Der-chang:s in the NRQ's emergency plan-' "so that we can then explore where that ruling that* state and local emergency rickson said Seabrook officials are flab-ning process," construction manager' mightlead."
officials will respond when the chips ' bergasted that the Atomic Safety and Willi:m Derrickson said Thursday at a ' While waiting for word on possible are down, even if they now say they Licensing Board has put off a license news conference at the plant.
'd
,'to resolve questions *about the plant'sfor fuel emergency planning changes, the plant won't participate.
Riporters pressed repeatedly for de ' has stepped up work on putting togeth.
Otherwise, others - possibly utility tills on what kind of changes he wants er its own plan to cover the six Massa-employees - would fill in for people control room and safetyissues.
l th; Nucl:ar Regulatory Commission to chusetts towns within the 10-mile needed to help in a nuclear emergency.
"The surprise in the licensing pro--
make, but Derrickson offered little ad-emergency zone.'
On Long Island, Qenz said, "we re- ! cess is truly a complete surprise 10 us,"
ditional information, excerit to say that Derrickson announced the hiring of a placed most of the local capability with hb said. "We believe it is totally un-the plint is so safe that strict rules the consultant who helped draw up plans utility workers from the utility down founded" for the board to reopen hear -
govtrnment requires might not be nec ' for the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long there."
- ings on issues that he said already have.
.'. ' Island, where the state has reiused to lie used tralfic control planning to beenaddressedbytheNRC.
csstryatSeabrook.
- i*
v r
4
' mo i
f 9
wAw ewa 7/3 /AG c.
Health care workers need a say in evacuation To the editor:
have paid their dues to society and are not responsi-In response to comments recently made by Mr. ble for our present energy plight.
Thomas Moughan of Amesbury and published in this Health care staff are among the most giving and pap:r, I was appalled to learn the role that has been unselfish of people, but they are people, people with assigned to hospital and nursing home residents and responsibilities and families; people with hopes and h alth care staff. The paragraph I am referring to dreams for the future. People who have the right to-stat:s that only medically safe patients / residents controltheirdestiny,notto haveitdictatedto them.
move, and those that cannot be evacuated must stay Seabrook's evacuation plan leaves. much to be b: hind. It further states " emergency staff workers" desired. It certainly dcesn't promote a feeling of will aiso remain.
~
safety or well being for residents of communities As a Director of Nursing in a health care facility surrounding Seabrook. Therefore, their fate must be only 12 miles from Seabrook, I am outraged. In this a hlgh priority wlth an evacuation plan.
land that allows us freedom of choice, who has I_do not believe this is the will of the Decole. How dictated this role to our incapacitated and our elders can it be when the neonte haven't been informed! If as w ll as their caretakers, without so much as Seabrook's licensure hinees on accentnnce of this informing them or enlightening them? When were we evacuation olan. then every hnenitnl nnd nitreirta going to be informed? After Seabrook fires up their home rertdent and every hentth enre wnrker in the_
reactor? Or, possibly, not til a nuclear accident surrounding area must be notified of their rnia As occurs!
Aiuci ican cittztens. that is ntir hnsit' richt_
)
Our senior citizens and hospitalized population MARY E. MIGHILL, R.N.
certainly deserve maximum safety considerations.
g Directorof Nursing Seabrook's emergency response plan gives them less Sea View Nursing Home_
than humane consideration. Certainly, our elders nowley A
4 p
v t
i t
t[
h - h lb h...t.
.q $ (. N'...,.,,....
g, q. e,- _W. g. c.7m - :v;. e z,y...; a > e, 9,,.u..
. : p,..
- 3.s n'c N d h'h h. h kM h,$ U,!.,h,.,[,'
.a
.: :..i -
3'h (
e h
.. w, w.s.w.t...o_D %. y x.....,.3~. ~,.... y.m., (e$ tM.Y.i I. "
.,..e...... e cry
. ? E M
If bM XW;g[elF s.e
. h
'.h.u.*l.N,,.[,$..$.k. J,u.7. &e.h4'h'y. n p.yW'.)%'5-%%:4 w' i.
TQ.3 w, i-I 3^.;,mN. a p%.a g@.w!.
M.I".r
$3. 2
- ,1. Call.1. Ek a--
-m
- ~s.
M -
- [ Y $ / 4 ('.'h 3,
.G.j,
. ~ ~
NgEWW..!.qhWM.. kv&v,$t. 9
. w,.....:.',.t.O a,.. w..S * ': ',.. - {'.
' * * )
MM Q4
,sgF'.w.5 M.~... M-M. 5?w.
d'N&....5..t.$?.S.,,,"%y.N, iT'~%,M: ~;.;t,.:*
ww, J +.. w,
5Q. %-.%..
. w
'$$u=
. r.
...,..S.m.Alh.'5,&-m..'
m&.
4.s.
.,3 ngag P
. O* a rt..r.x,, ; y.,y
- m., : <J.y s,,. _v,
- r. e...
,2
.e
.m..
i
..+o1r.......A.. N h W. <) t..,
s r.../
. ~.,.
.g,,.
y..
u p%.y ~3 i sp ap.-
m
..e-
)
....[..Y..,'.*._.
- .. ;Z
- '.#-E
^ Q 7'N~&#'ddh.dN h i
.W'j;#:,, @ a.'M.,nl w'6 M[ w s.N 'M MM h'],,{ %m.fr.... f[6;GW s
~.... ~.. D...
.1#.'IM N M ',..
- "'b'*
I,'
. ' ' _ f'.
.M dy 'Y M. d. [ $ m.,
I
'I.# f j
'L'N'ep' a
4 e
n. m @k - m,, h. & : e h,* 1 & S W Q' Q.% 2 M.. u?.
ip 1
+:. e' m.R.dW%mmmp(tm?AL., d..:%!B *'ur.,w r ";M,t
- s w.
m% -* W T.t
- i ~y" Si#Dj.$.Wy.mW9'd
.RSN..
4 l
dh M i.;n h. h.3 4 $4.G n$r p % MM.n.a M.mE9%n,N.s.uu.h,, s.a...'Wu W
tYTGM3b.%M 3
~.
4
.M.
sEF 7
' ' m'T
&%W s--c,.4 u.
n
-~. 6, L W+%..p'Q N'4"-lTJF'? >$ >.W+' a.
1
$g
..w- - y
" <'M" m
m
- n. r is q t 6 ~' M.
~WJ4' 1
~' Tiv S ";
.M.D7.g@...'.'.M. A"DC
. V' ".Y.
. %* %. r
- ).
-*"'Qs
.'*l.&"blN,..;& y t.W'G.'*:Ta
~
e 9,y
's-0'
.T; b /
h h k h h h @Q. % g..P % W W..M Q &.h..B M G;
Y hI -
db Ih N
.bdr "r
W*
in n~g! cab. Emergency u,Mwem,=M,.me.S M R R D
,, @.,,....O M
$. h,g~.c c.,e.r.h. -,;.w.m.,o.e.e -.. v$.,.,". ~.. q s.,
. ~
.,.g-9 a a.%.9 jM.p,q O
l M:.,hrW;.,, p;k;.4p.,d.r'%" D. e
%W*y,p n g. u. >;"'.h,'*C
.t...',;;,:..d u r.:.e
- "; 4
!m l
ti Rrr ce'Df.,.o-Qi..
4
..*.q.
ii W
?;e
- %.'7
, g.
& y?.a.
i.L(A.. a:. :
-.,; W".a-NQ..,,,.7..... rQ'.. "' M,.
g
...t..
k,i[.N"n"k.7.,y,;[{k.i..
1>. n.'W.. -
.p
- d'kE-([MM:k#$$h' _ NNII-3[L'"; -.
. r.. e s
yc y M. ['..
i f'NSM.v.$'.$sQN,y$.fMNhW1 6
5 ya...-:n.,., ~.' r n A...T,.2 n, :c. ~.,f.
. e.., -.,, n...
2,
' ~
T
.9:.,.
m ed.w.*:,#..
pe..,. w.,. ~,
~ m.
y 1
G.u ;alW9MWhMp ::
. o... v-
- . e s
s _...
s a
Q ';'.Sf e,$t.t.T-M 'W.3.%$*in$g -h-%g rtWassaghuse g :T y)j. @ ;;F f. k l2 # m : d, f~. Q
.~h##M',..;-
..:f.C @.f."
3 Q,'s.g." Q ~ Q ;%.Wi&*%t,t %,'8L d & N 6:Ag GQ'M'.
&&.2
.C.as1 M ?.LSTM W W G h i y # d f M W.jMi&:
..@M.. :'.: -
....,.N }hWW.hYhhW;,f5$p$GKhh.5$$! 'h. u$
j5'h-;4p.,,.e 7
.Jr %.e...u..... o or. :.N.
J.5"g..,q-% A,,;jC#ib.,.
.~
~
. Y., )
, W $?5'M 5&Y.
&$!:h W 2 & 5k W M
Y..k,b'.
& ^ G % N Q y ;;;& % # 4 i P M '
$LT.51%g.W7.ON!7 ::MNM3 A M,D,7U M Mi.iSI N I yf D
- +
'l..
Q:$@:s'-5:E8!#M'Qi P
? :*0,,. * * : l;~.' ~:
' ~):-
ti$' 5.Niti%%
0 N'
CrG' GdR Q Q'?lCC f W hM. N,Y@.OQ:f^&&j5'y. Yi$5$WS$55$DN
',.:':,': 'W
~a',k$k' bk N
& g.
1 E $y c'
n k,..,pr..p,$9.&rw..N
,,v )Lv g.puky.EMkM$N.d,bbb..5M.b..4-b + N-C, % x,g r.
,,u 3,,
n.. M.,r, w= =x# w. wy*e.7:: cM...t.
. c <r -
s h
- c.,
~ maw-w. : wh.. M.espr.
. p;m.w, kere x. Nep m m.u
.x,< n. - ~.,n.
U
('W.+.J.,,. r egg {G.QW'f,4,gr.q;J'.'f.M:p*b;f,.*mqi,;9 ~ p~w.g:1. Q;n.. M rgi
. - ' A. %.*r'4:
o
-c... -,,, g r, n,p ;p.
y,bg.p.;....y;...
I
'E t
-.M.dy%'Yt OYWW,@. &. M>p.m,W.M4W W.
a
- 4. #@w%m."p, wg4,7r. ywpr..e; a.o.v.sl%.,..W.
- d.,..N.M@g.g:'JqLm.-.7..Ow,w$.,.y.s,c%
L.M., %.3.,,.
MMWP."Js.MM W
M-p Q...
1.
JnG b-
- n.; -@.1.p.
.T r./c..q..,H
..,u p-ch. W -W.
-;-p- [y%: Q.'.n "%gf t,*g.4N *..c4" *%.. * '@r M i.- ;-
'r w"rm m:U.: g:
9* ::f. r
....ns'&ch.s
--s.P s
~ ~:,:~ ::.A, MW.m,v. g w.
...m.y
<.,r.~. %. a " e,.,;,t.,+... q.a. m ea; 4.;*.. :.r.*.
k e." N. M r.-;:u., m.,
h.r-;g h. %. ;.%.sq.c.f.;.. ;,#,
- a -.;;y.,uq.,;,.c. 9.
- .1'.%p;.s,..u.
..I,.r
.t V. P..i f.-
6;r -
3.w.,c <+.Oh._ f. 4..yjlgh.'<.W;.1.w-
,.a f.y,u p
i..
- w.z.
s.
.a=
uw. v a,w f, g.p :,.y y;., *3,w,.. e -. 7 q,.;
.-.m,... %? t4 Q*..j.u
..V
~~.u...
-s n.
a q..t)
- l.
l,'
..p
.3 *f.'s,w.
r t * *_,.
,sj. 9 sr.t.y =;.
.y.fe,
?.*,t.
q*
e
~
i f
CITY OF lElBURYPCRT
[
O V
W d
IMFilMENCHE PROCEDURE 10.2-EERGarl RESPCtGIBILITIES ~0F THE HEALTH AGENE SITE AREA EMERGErf AND GENERAL EMERGE!Cf i
HAME:
i TIME SITE AREA EME2Gart AND GENERAL DERCDCf i
NOIE:
IF THIS IS A FIRST NOTIFICATION REEEIVED, CmFETE ALL STEPS.
IF ESCAIATICH FRCH AN AIIRT, PROCEED TO S'EP 9.
-1.
tpon notification by the ththuryport Police DLspatcher,- -
m--
report to the EOC in the Haskuryport HLgh School.
NOIE:
E EU ARE IMEIED VIA PAC lER OF A " SITE AREA EMERCDCf' CR A " GENERAL EME3GENCY" AT THE SEABROOK STATICH, REPCRT DtEDIATELY TO THE EOC IN THE NENBURYPCRT HIGI SCHOOL.
IF YOU CAlam REIORT TO TIE EOC WITHIN 30 MINUIES 1 THE NEJBURYICRT POLICE DISPATCHER AT 'EIEPHOE NO.
2.
Maintain a log of your activities throughout the emergency and docunent messages in accordance ulch EOC procedures.
3.
0:ntact the hospital and nursing hanes in Attachnent 10.2-1.
i..
4.
Baquest they provide you with the following infor: nation:
a.
the total census of each facility, b.
the nunber of patients / residents sich can be-transported by a bus, the nunber of patients / residents sich require anbulance c.
assistance, and d.
the nunber of patients / residents sich cannot be :ncned.
Bacord this infonnation on Atrar hment 10.2-2.
5.
Provide a copy of the infocsation on Attachnent 10.2-2 to the Civil Defense Director.
6.
Cbordinate with the Energency Medical Services (bordinator Q
~~
and the Civil Defmse Director on assessing the transpor-cation needs of the Anna Jaques Baspital and nursing banes.
10.2.1 Draft 3 4/86
TIME 7.
Contact your alternata and arrange for continuous 24-hour
- . n coverage of your position in the EOC.
Inform the Operations U
,0fficer of the schedule.
/
8.
Contact the Anna Jaques HospitaLaIx! nursing hanes and request the nunber of energency staff wrkers that will renain behind to care for patients Milch cannot be moved.
l 9.
Provide the information received in step 9 above to the RAD officer.
10.
If sheltering is reconnend,ed:
a.
}beify the hospital and nursing homes on Attachnent 10.2-1 to shelter in place by:
- 1. closing dmrs arxl windows, 1
- 2. shut off ventilation systems that make use of outsi,.de air, and 4
4
- 3. moving patients / residents to inner roans / hallways if
{
possible.
i
- b. Request the hospitals and nursing homes to verify that they have enough food, supplies and medicines for an extended sheltering period.
- c. If instructed by FCDA to use KI, contact Anna Jacques Hospital and Nursing Hamas to determine the number of emergency staff wrkers performing essential activities.
~
Provide this information to the RAD Cfficer for the issuance of KI to these workers.
- d. Ehsure that hospitals and nursing hanes continue to j
shelter in place tmtil notified by you.
NOIE: IF ANY DOUBT EKISIS AS b WHAT CCNSTITUrES AN ESSENTIAL l
ACTIVITY, CNSULT EE CIVIL CEFENSE DIREC.TR.
If an evacuation is reconsnanded:
l
- a. Contact the hospitals and nursing homes on Attachnent 10.2-1 to provide an update of the information in i
Attachnent 10.2-2, and to request that they begin to pre-pare their patients / residents for evacuation.
I IME:
GLY THDSF. IOSPITAL PATIENTS AND NURSING }ENE RESIDENIS WlO ARE MIMED MEDICAILY SAFE 10 POVE ARE 10 BE EVACUATED.
THOSE PATIENIS/RESIDENIS WHICH CANtm BE EVAQRTED SiOULD
- BE SimMRED IN PIACE Al%%)RDING TO ME PROCEDURES CUrLINED t-IN'SIEP X, ABOVE.
s.
- /d 10.2.2 Draft 3
~
4/86 i
Qlr
,y f
b.. Coordinate with. the Energency Medical Services Coordinator
.and the Civil Defense Director..on dispatching buses and anbulances frcan the primary transportation dispatch center to the hospital and nursing homes.
- c. meify.the hospital and nursing hcmes as the buses and ambulances are dispatched to the individual facilities.
- d. Ehsure that the staff at the hospital and nursing hcznes know tha host facility to send tam patients / residents to.
Attachnent 10.2-4 is a 1.ist of the host facilities to be used.
- e. Ehsure that the appropriate files, identifications, medi-cine etc. 'acccupany each patient / resident.
- f. meify host facilities of the number of patients / resident to expect and their expected time of arrival.
- g. If instructed by ICDA/
P. Area 1 to use KI, notify the hospitals and nursing homes to distribute KI to the staff according to the directions established by the RAD Officer.
12.
If pu leave the IOC, assign an alternate to staff pur position.. meify tha Operaciou Officer of the change.
13.
Standby for notice of deescalacion or termination of the emergency.
14.
If terminated, provide a copy of all logs and messages to the Civil Defense DLrector.
15.
Remarks / Actions Taken:
s
- -c' O
~~
\\
10.2.3 Draft 3 4/86 s
\\
q
..~y
- u ly 19,198G O
oa f
gf
,m Builders of Seabrook have underestimated Rowiey To the Editor:
the hand by experts.This is not the Seabrook station has been look. case. This is a bipartisan issue that ing to fire up for a long time. I want involves people of all walks oflife. I them to know that this town is fired believe that you only have to. hive up and our pilot is not going to go common sense to know thatp6 clear out.Ithink the builders ofSeabrook poweris not a good thing forus here station have underestimated the in Rowley or anywhere,else in this people of Rowley as well as the country or in the world,.,,
other towns and people involved in this issue. The issue of Seabrook This country was base' on free-d dom. freedom of choice and free.
station as it pertains to th,e Town of Rowley and its res,idents is certain. dom of speech. We must exercise this right and that is what we have
,1y an emotional issue w,th good done in Rowley. That is the big dif.
i reason. We are talking about our ference between the United States town our people, our children.
and Russia
- Seabrook station has involved this town by their choice not ours. I for To Gov. Dukakis aird those sena.
,one don't have to have Chernobyl tors and representatives who have happen at Seabrook station to know already taken a stand on this. we I don't want it to happen here, applaud what you have done so far.
In my view, the statement'made As far as other elected officials and.
by the people of Rowley is'a' strong yes. President Reagan. there are a indication of how people here and.lotofuswhoarerunningoutofpati.
across this country feel about the 'ence and I for one have already safety issue and the potential of done that. People are looking for nuclear disaster. Chernobyl and leadership on this issue. That is Pilgrim station have opened the what Rowley's petition was all ab-eyes of people around the world.
out. Given Chernobyl. It's about Seabrook station tells us they time that they address this issue have a different design than Cher. and take a stand one way or the nobyl. but once radiation escapes. other.,Either you are for nuclear the results would be the same, powerand nuclearwaste oryou're It has been my experience sinceI against nuclear power and nuclear have been involved and in my own waste. It's time to get off the fence views asit pertains to Seabrook sta. and let the votes fall where they tion that the Seabrook authorities may. That's the way it should be.
want everyone to believe that any.
Thank you for this opportunity.
j one who is against nuclear power Stephen B. Comley are fanatics and are being led by Mansion Drive i
'NQ f
\\\\b u L U
S k
h (3
(,)
/
i
/
In other business, Seabrook nuclear plant petitio'n -
organizer Stephen Comley asked the board to deiay bringing the petition to Gov. Michael Dukakis.
~
- .T -,-. ~.'~-
Comley said he wants to gath, r even more signa-i e
tures for the petition so that as many people as possible may be represented.
Comley organized a signature drive for a petition which asks Dukakis to include Rowley in evacuation planning for the Seabroolo. N.H. nuclear power plant.
The selectmen said '. hey had understood they were v to act as quickly as possible in setting up an appoint-
. ment with the governor, and had already asked Sen.
Robert Buell and Rep. Thomas Palumbo to seek a meetingwithDukakis/
Comfey can continue getting signatures, but if an appointment is obtained soon, the ;own must honor it and deliver the petition as it is, board members
.. agreed.
,i 9
I
)
i
$WAri$p s
Q
';,y r nwtry (l %**N,*,8 E
l r'N 1633
Q,)
^
"A ss-
.r-4 Eatun of Eatulcp fEassarl usetts 01959 Boarb of friertmen 948-22T2 s
July 25, 1986 Honorable Francis X.
~Bellotti, Esq.
Attorney General of the Commonwealth 1 Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108
Dear Mr. Bellotti:
Attached is a resolution urging your assistance to assure that Rowlay is included in emergency evacuation planning for the Seabrook Nuclear Station.
Our secondary school children attend Triton Regional School in Newbury which is within the ten-mile evacuatior-zone.
These children woul:i i
be transported to Peabody in a nuclear emergency but the.r families in Rowley are not involved in this planning and the details of the evacuation of thess children are not being coordinated with their parents.
We request that you use the authority of your office to ascertain that the terms of this resolution are met prier to the opening of the nuclear plant.
Yours truly, l
bYd-cm.
~
/
q E. Carl Dasch Gary W.
Hanson Chairman Clerk GWH/ fee CC: S. Comley O
J' 4
i
._a
. - ~
-.--__....~~._~_m__-~1
~~ ~
~
. rt 1
- 30. 2 sections,100 Pages-Thursdzy, July 24,1986 A pubtlestion of North Shots Waskfias. Inc. 35c lkoNsting Seabrod
.s
~
~
s,
- Rowley to;Dux, ak..is
- inc uc e-us in evacuah.on p an ;
By DAVID TRUEBLOOD '
. are people wholivein the town but
, The Board of Se'ectmen voted who are not included in the street i
i xotooneMondaynighttoaskGov.' list.
f l lichael S. Dukakis not to approve.
On the list as well are 176 young '.
i ny evacuation plan for the Seab ' adults and children.They were in-g i ook nuclear poweg plant that does cluded.he explained,to makea spe-l ot include Rowleyh cial point.
,..e :. :...
! When the selectmen. realized too One provision of the evacuation
.I j aany people were gathering to fit' plan put together by Seabrook offi.
g 1 ato their downstairs office, they" cials would split families in the 4
l.nd about 100 spectators moved up-eventof a nuclear accident,he said. (
3
~
l tairs to thelarger metting room at; Comley said high school students
!.'own IIall. Many of the spectators -from Rowley attend Triton Iligh.
i
- vere young children. A group of School,which is in Byfield. Byfield
)
i nackdoorway.Threetelevisionnet-side the 10-mile limit. Therefore, !
'if.
f l tigh school students gathered at the is located in Newbury, which is in-3P
! vorks covered the meeting.
! Comley said, those children would j P,N
[
In the days leading up the the be evacuated to Peabody in the
. neeting Stephen B. Comley.of event of an accident at Seabrook.
l,.;
'stansion Drive, owner of Seaview Parentswould notbenble todrive l
- Mursing Ilome on Mansion Drive, irito the 10-mile limit, to Triton.or to i
1
~
! irganized a petition drive against decide for themselves what to do t
g.
j i scabrook's evacuation plan.Mith with their own children.
<4
. This is our town," Comley de- )
.,; 7..
f
.ittle time and no chance to adver--
6
' ise, Comley collected 1,479 names :clared Monday night, "and these f ' '
..g I from Rowley residents who want to are our kids. And no one outside of i
. '>e included in any plan to evacuate town is going to tellus what we are
! the area if the nuclear plantinSeab-going to do with our kids."
6 8
' rook, N.11., has an accident.
"What about our children?"
(
y i
That list of names, Comley told asked Andrea Cooper, of 269 d
i l the selectmen Monday night, in-Wethersfield St., who attended the 'i d8il
/*
8 i
l cludes t.276 adults.Of those,868are - meeting. "Shouldn't Seabrook l listed as registered voters in the answerthesequestions?Shouldmy {
l town and.189 are not registered., son get bused to Peabody or some-
,e 9.4 centlaued on Page 32
,c p.
- s. i
- Also, Comley said,219.who signed r
.......,...i, y.. g., - q r,e m. 9, r g...
standing with papers in hand, to the Board of. secretary Betty Creed, Selectman Garylla
)
Selectmen drew coverage from all three Boston Selectmen's Chairman., Carl Dasch and Select.~,
. (Per' y Catlin photo) television networks Monday night. Above, Com man Aldene Gordon.
c
,L.l
......g j
{
i ley explains his objections to Seabarook evacua-l
Page 32. Thursday, July 24,1986
~;
k'
~
1 7
,,,,. 7 _
o TOWiew 1e4,a-u.4
. _,,- - n m j
. n u -~
p-m
(,-
.p /.
Row leyJo Dukakis: include' us j
i[Seabrodk's evacuation plans
~ ';, -.
. s..
1 Continued..
w place while I stay here and don't
+
know where he is Selectman Aldene Gordon opposed the petition.
"I am'most concerned ab'out the A
panic mania that has gripped the i
towninthe pastfewdays,"she read
,...h g
from a prepared statement while
, q,J. -d s
l,,
TV cameramen trained bright Q:
lights on her.
. :. ;. +.. -
9
, a[
' \\ Q,l
]g
...Js Residents should notfear nuc!dar
'.i g
fuel, she said, because the process
.. i
, p;.
'c. -
i f.
l is carefully supervised. Fossil fuels
' e s..q.,,.
' j,.
by whichit is used to create power
'(y J.'
such as oil and coal pose a more
~.
~
serious threat, she said, because
+o t
?
'k. : (D'.',,~"
they pollute the air and water.
.r "Let our power be created by nuclear plants which assault neith.
er theland nor the water,"she said,
,,.,.7 i
1 while some of the audience snick.
i l
I ered. "Seabrook was created be.
IT MAKES NQ SENSE for our children to be bused away while cause we need the power. I don't we remain here in the event of an nuclear accident, Stephen think we should fear nuclear gen.
Comley told the Selectmen Monday night. The Mansion Drive eration."
resident organized a petition drive Iast week that collected over Selectman Gary Hanson said he 1,700 signatures.
(Perry Catlin photo),
has confidence in nuclear power as aneffectivewayto generate needed NRC, which Dasch seconded. Both
' l electricity. But he said he was wdl. men voted for the motion. Gordan h
ing to accept direction from resi' was opposed.
dents on the matter of the petitio,n.
The crowd applauded the vote.
g l
"As a personal opimon " he said-
"What happens aner this resolu.
i "after a tour of the plant (at Seab. tion is passed?" asked Kathleen rook) I was very impressed. I don't Ganley, of 128 Central St.
W
't have a problem,with nuclear Dasch said he will personally de.
d! >
liver the petition to Dukakis at the l
power.
. However, as a member of the statehouse, and have a copy sent to
..)
Board ofSelectmen."he continued, the NRC.
"I took an oath to uphold the wel.
'After the meeting,Comley thank.
l fare of the citizens. Even though I ed those who het ed collect signa.
don't totally agree with some of the. tures and those w o signed the peti.
~
issues they have raised, I think. tion more planning could be done."
+ *'
~-
He is still collecting signatures.
Selectmen's Chairman Carl Dasch suggested that a copy of the, he said, for the selectmen to send to r
the statehouse.
l O
petition be sent,to the Nuclear Reg.
..We should rally around the gov.
THE ROOM upstairs in Row.
ulato Commission (NRC). The ernor now." Comley said. "He has ley Town Hall was packed Wash ngton, D.C.. agency, he done more than a lot of officials Monday with parents and pomted out, has active authority would do in this matter. He is tisten.
their children, who were pro.
over the plant at Seabrook and ing t U3 "
testing Seabrook's evacua.
would have more power than Gov.
~
tion plan. Sitting in the front j
Dukakis to include Rowley'in the "Coniley said he intends to con.
tinue to work on the issue of Seab.
row were Brian Ganley and evacuation plan.
Hanson made a motion to resent rook and the threat it poses to the his son, lan, 4, of Centrr,I g
the petition to Dukakis an to the communities that are close to it.
Street. (Perry Catlin pho,toj
dg##%4I Let us ini o
,d,'
on pla., :1ns t i
A.
...I I
2.e.%C%gQgo. ",j.g @ -@ S 'c 5:S 6 :n
..]
- By ANN CARRNS m m e=~
Daily News staff e'
E o # m c.aa2Ea
-m m g (,. r m ROWLEY - It's official: Rowley is asking to be E !i e.
- 4 m.L (E -
included in evacuation plans for the Seabrook nu-
=-
g I'O.g g
~ E C.;
.o g
n.= g ' -EEy9a 1m ea clear power plant, 3 EEEE'" 3 n.
g e 15 3 I The selectmen voted 2 t last night to ask Gov.
"EE o g E 9 % [< 4 g@o. 'g Michael S. Dukakis and the Nuclear Regulatory m
g 1,
'?g8 5
m'
- y Commission (NRC) not to approve any plans whlen a p $.3 g 2.n - 2 g N A crowd of some 85 people applauded the select-moa do not include Rowley.
8,
"~%
^~
ggg
=m >
]
gg.g3go=3yn,-
c.
ea men's decision, which came after the board moved g
= c' aQ",g its meeting from its regular meetingroom to a large
<n
,a g'
2Co E8x hall upstairs in Town Hall to accommodate th,e
- "E $ g m g c
- r 9Rq
'W gE$m$@e crowd.
ggN e-4=
. Stephen Comley of Mansion Drive, an administra. -
~
tor at Sea View nursing home, gave the selectmen a auo oca g$ 4 7 9 9 C-T O
petition which he said contained 1,&9 signatures 1E h.gg 3 a.a..k @a f*{g{ g 3a.c2. %g$E urging the board to sign the resolution.
sin a>3o44 4=
The signatures, which included about 180 from " ~.
=gs g
O
- "as*r5 ^"d cat 2drea *ere cottected a ^ door-ta-m : $ ", y $ g: # C 4 2 9 j door petition drive over the weekend.
m
- ~
4 S' 2, E 4 y 3 E g =.e,'*c E E a*g y Federal law requires Dukakis to submit evacua, mg,pgE ec ag4 E e.,
sg$~-
within 10 miles of the plant before the plant can ~
tion plans for the six Massachusetts communities x * $j $ E.9,,if;l g E" g D s "-
E E $ = g m :E'"E =' g g a e
receivdts operatinglicense.
= 8 :; = m *4,5 *4 ;ro a E y,
=E%,
g Rowley falls just outside the 10-mile radius, so it is E g = 3. $ ="h.E " 3,"' 8 '!. y 8 ' 1 e-5 E E "-
O not included in evacuation plans. However, the 5
33 p3 town's children attend Triton Regional High School o 3 s 2,S ;r n 8.
o T-E = a cy h.elghboring Newbury, which falls inside the 10-31Rg5%
2 E4 e g-C rnile zone.
4 "E m ' :.@ S E.m.eE1 nae
- 1<
8 b 8'$.Q E"EEE "This is our town and these are our kids " Comley g" ( h @Sa.{-E $ 3 EER o
?
b said, gesturing to several children in the audience.
3 gg "Nobody is going to tell us we don't have a say."
EEME Q
Rowley's vote to be included in evacuation plans T%e#93 E8E E R E. E *. E. 5* " 4 ~ *9-o a E
- EE @.E" m *' E 8
comes after four of the six Massachusetts communi-
"~*
E E
a3 cj U ties within the 10-mile radius voted to withdraw from
"'g"s$$T1EE"E.Nm*9"EE D
evacuation plar.ning, on the premise that any plan is 3oE unworkable.
'. ~ -
- E.{ g m'% 4 E.4 E j 4 = 3 ' "b" g ~b Comley has said he has reservations about a Ea$
3 o E c % 3.m 3 $ 'E.g, 5"E =_ %'.$ 5 *, C
~~
E<
workable plan, but that if Dukakis app' roves plani, g
9 5 { g E.E ~o, h.= - 3 $ 3 @
Rowley should be included.
HEE!e Selectman Aldene Gordon voted against the reso-
.[.
3 8 " s =: s E.e 9 o !'E. g Sce g
lution, saying she was upset at the " panic mania"
'f 3 a E 1
o*
that had struck the town over the past several days
~@o9-Ey9N 3
. E'E E g 3 e regarding Seabrook.
d3"4**:~ " % % E.g Seabrook's electricity is needed and the plant is
- 8 m - c.1
=.
4 o452d2
'^
"E E
a" O
safe, she said..
- 1 o
. E *2.'8 E a '.3 EhE U E h g-3 EE3 3Egm 3E=E5 Selectman Gary Hanson said he personally is not ao
~ $ "- g % R"U5,N 3 3 m ",!-
5S'3!^m
.cause a large number of people are concerned about against nuclear power or Seabrook. However, be-the evacuation plans, he said he would support the *q O---
resolution as their elected representative.
Selectman Carl Dasch said the board is not neces-
~~
sarily opposed to the plant's starting operation, but that there are many unanswered questions regarding Rowley's role in any evacuation plan.
Those questions include the role of Rowley police during an evacuation, which would send residents >~
from the evacuation zone down Route 1 and Inter.* -
state 95, both of which go throu gh Rowley.
f Rowley, page A10 i
f
$0h? k
.M Dhbf N N
$.5 b'
8%VPilIP"DihMhi.habkliiHHF' N.lini i ig 2 @ * ' O c o + u 1g3 h5 5 Sh
%' h$'
D.E h.
l E
n
!!ll!.
n,Jsrea 3 g] d dian E iiilE9st asgoia s gi r[52OHvipr Lg 2 isEO K a 3.5 e l$[ijg E ifE*E9 an " d O E a
h d. same =
l a
i XFCO
" 'f n
Eg &aa @.
m
===
a A
i e e=
"dy!ign aba% ?! i4Hr!! KCE
~ al.? !!
a a O.,~ 7 @ :,': 3 : o "2
EgrDie si.1g M. 5' a
~
a eag ea
_,. m u a,e m m me e.
? -
3
~-
g e.
~q
... ~ ~..
I A10 Newburyport Da;ly News, Mondoy July 21,1986 ROWLEY: Selectmen to consider petition i
e Continued from page Al before it can receive its operating ties closest to Seabrook would license.
travel through Rowley, he said.
Itowley lies about 12 miles from Asked if the petition would be Daschsaidhedoesnot necessar-Seabrook. Ilowever, llowley stu-sent it -)ukakisif theselectmen do lly oppose the eventuallicensing of dents attend Triton Itegional fligh not adopt the resolution, Comley Seabrook, but that it makes sense School in neighboring Newbury, said, "I really have faith in our to have Rowley included somehow which lies within the evaevation selectmen."
In the evacuation plans before the zone.
Comley said he is associatut plant starts operating.
"We're talking about our kids with the Citizens Within a Ten Mlle Selectmen Aldene Gordon and here," Comley said. "As far as I'm Itadius group, which opposes 11- '
Gary llanson could not be reached concerned, (Seabrook) has fired censingottheplant.
~
for comment this morning.
up the wrong people. The people in Comley said be has reservations Federal law requires Dukakis to this town are committed."
about the workability of evacua-submit evacuation plans for the six Further, Itowley -would be af-tion plans, but that it is important Massachusetts communities with ~ fected by any evacuation because for llowley to be included in any in a ID-mile radius of the plant some people leaving the communi-plans that Dukakis approves.
i
)
e
1 CV o
i 7 ;;1J6 h/8PP beids
.ETTERS imummun e An altemate must be found to nuclear. powei
' To the editor:
I am angry. Angry that an industry such as theireducationalrepresenbtives.
/
Seabrook, or any nuclear power plant, can have such I have to say after talidng with them, touring theid and the future of unborn generatlocs. I am angry thata profound effeet we are offered little say in something that affects all monster.was wasted towards a solution that produces of us. We already know as consumers that we are It's time that we realize and know/
i that radioactiv" expected to pay for this plant's mistakes because the power is not a viable, safe alternative for futur3 rate payers involved at Plymouth's Pilgrim Power Plant are going to be paying for Edison's mismana needs. It goes without saying, that this will mea sacrifice,:but until n scfe alternative is found do tors proposed at Seabrook were originally estimatedgement and shut-down costs. Th at $900 million in 1710. Curren'ly the construction of equany ashaportantas the solution.
only one reactor will cost over $4.6 billion. We, as tax For years, State Senator Nicholas Costello a payers, are also insurers of these plants. Our govern Representative i.rbara Hildt of Ame. bury have been alerting us to the' dangers and financial folly off ment insures nuclear plants as conventional insur-Seabrook Station..Their concern for safety, ance companies will not take the risk.
I am appalled at the thinking and the blinders waste disposal, cutrageous rate predictions an6 worn by our Government. How they can even think eventual plant dismantling are real and obvious. It le about letting Seabrook start up with 5% capacity federal elected officials to follow their Chernobyl, which was running at only 7% when itwithout receiving the complete i exploded, is totally irresponsible. The recent infor. next generation from nuclear dependency.
I have met some of the people who have been
' nation involving the Chernobyl disaster has in' Jnvolved in opposing Seabrook for a long time a formed us that the land may not be useful for years," others who are newly involved. These p 7.5 people are dead,18,000 hospitalized without con-sidering those who chose not to be hospitalized or fanatics. They are people who would rather be spend.
even those who think they may not have been affect
- ing their-time doing something else, but who realize ed. This will certainly affect all of these people in how wro'ng this is and are totally conimitted to making it right. Wbether you want to acknowledge it exercised our right to freedom of choice. Why letsome way for the rest of theirlives Seabrook jeopardize ourselves, our familles, our they.cannot do it alone. I am glad that I am making communities, our lives by forcing themselves upon my opinions known and will continue to do so. I am asha med that I did not get involved sooner, us?
Don't think I am not sympathetic or blind to the We should n11 he interested if nnt fnr nortelves nt people who are working at Seabrook, or those that least take the resransibility for our children as wen '
are heavily invested or to the fact that the very as for future anneratinns who will be affected later hv the decisions we make nnw We have in = tar
- 5y reason nuclear power plants were started was to give caring and then thinkine that we enn make a differ.
us an alternative to our regular energy producers.1,ence tsecause we can.
thought it my responsibility to listen and fa'ndlarizc" myscif with the Seabrook Nuclear Plant's side of the STEPHEN B. COMLEY i story, so I re,cently visited the plant and spoke to Rowley
. -.... ~.. _............
h 103 f
.1 A
M23'akk%'///d t&'ff Hid aM G4 x $de.
Swe$. GlbitadbJdJ WS69 N
f y
f
\\-)
8 f
-s.-
i g,.gh.n, - d
(
1
. 4 d,.948-5553 gw.
- p 4
t
@"!LMiG.- i
- -; q %
. y
.948-7440 l
iw &
I
?
x June 27, 1986
___a
~<
6 Governor Michael cukakis t
Stat'e Ecuse
~
Bost:m, Mass.
4
Dear Governcr Dukakis:
.t J
I cmmend ycu on the acticn you have taken so far en Seabrcck'and hcper that ycu will continue to guard our righ*a.
S Enclosed you will find an article that I have sent to a nur er of papers and also thcught it my respcnsibility to give ycu a cepf of this and let ycu knew bcw I feel.
1 Itf family have been Pcwley residents for ever 30 years. We also have run i
the, Sea View Nursing Ecue for ever 30 years and are proud of what cur staff have accmplished cver the years.
l j In addition to the article, I am encidIing scre additienal informatien l
that; I F2vis mlates'to the Sa=hrcck evacuatien plans.e re amss that certains to the safety of cur residents are expendable.
The article irmlies that cur cur ' elders to be. shcwn this lack of censideratien.We have kerked tco hard in thi cr ycur aides looking f'irther into this matter.
I sculd appreciate ycu i
,i In case ycu don't recall Sea View, ycu bcnored our residents in 1976 i
i Sbod and the 'Icpsfield Fair yearly.for their work in our Greenhcuse the hicce did en it.
Enclosed ycu will find an arEicle that
~
' Sincerely, LAL) f 1
Stephen B. Ccmley
[
Administrato:.
SBC nk I
o t
n5c7 Nd?
Amn.eco um o
a
.t.,
l0Y 6'
We, the citizens of Pcwley, Passachus tts appeal to you, Penald Paagan, 'th President of the United States,'to' address the following cen'cerns and reccmendatiens that we,.the undersigned, have regarding the Nuclear Pegulatory Ccmnissien, a Federal Agency that has the ability,to license the Seabrcck r.a : :.c.,...f Nuclear Plant that is lccated in Seabrcck, Nea Earpshire but involves varicus town in. Massachusetts because of the ld mile radius.
.w The reascns for our correrns are these:
A.
Our children live two miles ~cutside the ten mile radius but attend
,a regicnal schcol inside the, ten mile radius. We have been told
-...,2-a "that we cannot be part of the evacuation p3anning. 'Ihis also applies to the residents of Sea Viea Nursing Hcme who are transferred to a hespital located inside the ten mile radius.
B.
Regarding the Padiological Drergency. Response Plan, Draft 3 4/86 0.2-2 which says "enly these hospital patients ard nursing haue residents who are deened mW11y safe to move are to be evacuated.
These patients / residents which cannot be evacuated should be sheltered in ~ - ' _
place."
(a ecpy is enclosed) c.:
r--
p In our opinion this not only affects nursing hcre and hoscital residents but it could affect anycne who had an coeratien and had to be sheltered in place that day.
C.
We feel that the Nuclear Regulatory Ccmission has been negligent in not making themselves available and ret calling us or being un en the issues in cur town.
It seers that they have represented the nuclear industry very well but they have not encouraged the incut of the people that may not be for nuclear power or have cencerns for safety in cur area.
Thus, we the citi:: ens of Pcwley, Massachusetts reccTend:
1.*
A.
'Ihat ycu set up a Ccmnissicn to see if the Nuclear Reculatcry Cmmission is acting rescensibly in representing and saying that the safety and concerns are being properly addressed for the pecple of Pcwley as well as pecple across this country.
B.
'Ihat you ask for a moratorium en the start up of any nea nuclear plants awaiting licenses until ycu ard we can be assured that we have the full infcntation back fran Cherncbyl to rake a resconsible decision to whether s-we should centinue thinking that nuclear pcwer is a safe alternative.
C.
'Ihat you renind the Nuclear Pegulatory Ccruissien that this is America rot Russia and they are hired by the pecple and are accountable to
- ^
the pecple, not just the people in the nuclear industry.
We were reninded on the 4th of July of what this country was fcunded for and we thank you for that. We are seeing that cur freedcm of speech and freedan of choice is being exercised.
I AGREE WIIH 'mE ABOVE REASONS AMD RECCMMATICMS.....
e i
>L 1...
..........s-~Z'.~.-
o
' h ;i.;.h,',
- 2.'Nd *. :
"l~ '. a
~ a.
- a.+*~O.
. l <.* :
- --..~%
~O
-h
.-~.~,.~%.
1 y
l
- i e
THE DAILY XEWS Newburyport, Manchusetts i
Duke
~
l The i
skips
+.
i t
rea NRC 3
Seabrook towns not on the tour
. =..._..
e u.- -
w
.o c,
4
==.%
1 Commission the tar 9et
s' ~
.i
.-=e=
of.increasingent..icism
- ====
= = =
' ar. ll.M;.* *.,=,=, ll mc:=.-i::::,;;ll
~~ a.
aa' *a aa. ~
=g
=. = = =
w:
== w.:
. -==. :.. =
=. _ = =
-~
~~
.=.: =a ~
=
= =., =. _
_,. _. = = :._.==>.= =
= = _.,.
=-
= ====.
=., = =a
.==
-~ ~ -.===
.= =:= = =
- =.=
. a
==a=~ - -
=:...~.
.=.,:= =
===. =:
= =:..=.===.r..==;
m.,.=:.:.=.= ;- = = = = =
=,-
- =
-e
- .= =_==.
- -=: ===. =.. _. :=.=., =_ :.- e,,p=.=.==.==
= ~--
r.= =_=..=.==.==.= e. - - =...=:.=....=....=..
Alook at the commission's makeup etf. R2= *=
": '.."c
~
on - -
= ;:"J".f, ~. "= J:
Y '.'.:.4=.- "" "'.l.::.'::
=,=,g,; _., ;.,,=, _-l==.,
,r,Jl:::
.s....
.,, y,,.
- .g. ggy=
.y
=a
- =
c.
~~
u t.
,u
- ~.
=lf.".*,"%
,.':".".'J:"* ::;'::!..
= "" ll:::,:"" *.'.'.*=l' m,.,
l
'N~ '
" ~
"""'. "!."*."."."."lll*"lll:
!==="t:" "," =" " -""
- = =-
t 6%
'5,:sf:jEEE n,.,..,.,~.
py ; k
=,::".,".,'J' =:'",=:
J enswars: n.'re g
- ',',pD,,,,,,.,,.'"'Y h
C IS
'N
{
- **. es *,.
~
2db."~~:".'a~"."",.::::':
=.". : =.'G St.
Wll:7."O*:"A".'".=
\\*
" rJ."lll". -. -
C*:' lll:.' ~~"* y--
.= - - =
r i
.;, g:,,,:;,.,g: :;.;,,,,.
o V E R
a.,
l tu
'8 T/Nse
/M ye gegg i
SeN7 0 U T 7 "6
' reo Mep44 Adofs
/N WMM M c L li e t N S Addio f// A%rgerVLv l
'ste4L sron MA Ap GV f/S Sitpf CQMI*/
x
_.,,,.my,.,-.-
g y
(_
~
~..
.u
...-. - ~
L.
u.w.. -.i
(
4e-Profiles of NRC NRC: Critics increasingly target commission
_.._.ge m_ e_,_p._.e..er.e _ _t d.ts
.a,s. m_tard m. m _e.e
,*.m.n p
sm re,m-r.y __.
.g.f -.m_.
Itere a G leet at tfte leur Nuclear Regulatory desire is Ine W W at an ad-tune me me pets
- mponance "
c --
^ by Pressessa Reagan amt le*?' Ellye WetaL an arterwy fer Former NRC etaarmas Nunsa
- FINANCIAL QUAUFIC4 tee ftfut oneYade.ag Senaie contarmatma:
the Unsom of Cannrwd Smnaista J Pauamne tu6d The uassung as 710N5. A modified two sales, Lassoo w. nest, chairmas: A
,to,ld,Ce,,gre,,es,,, rec,e,,nu,y.,,",L.'afe,r,.
P,ost,,un May e,at,c,r,itru.himanup,aagsties te other eencet er s
. m aneut maa"urtear embatartne cotasander.163 hecasne mare im. zem a a reind m ednurai
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,S.e,,in
,,,e,, g m,e,,,
i t,s,, a e,m,,g,n,m,io.,f,u,,es w
y ra nc aad e e
u
,,4 3
e charmam July &.
NRC te mm a credsB6e regwatar. E tas trted to " clarify and maae sage Dunng his 3 yews is the Navy, he was a eme.
le eunpiy set shie is ensede mat sense em ei es regWattent" reu>
- F ALSE ndaTElt! AL3; A g
maaling etHcer et hath unace alugn W m es hap manaans reapared as une e thas retaams unme as many Wience a proposed as saaae a uu shsetry B regulaaes are sieL" have criarget Dry laatse for manavutterig iesas saa Asase frere emnerem assymuss with the Na'?
in WsahangsmL he gage asyved as ressmander af the Las year une enhasy had ta w
'u" '"
,)' afne f U S Naval Fereen m Japan from intem were essety retste tance Three p
Anas toad This merse has heue New e eEllMy een he feed for falte nenne tasaniL esta te pseeent of the
,9 RecSL EL = a Aeuwe of Oreges and greemased hoe repeatmaly acemaed my has marem> mataments in heta wnttee one la U S paants bee 9 ceased aner ear. unde W Eacs Jr. m amise> osaam amannasiacatsere. ser erries me u s Navna meteemy m itae having *sagrutheant Gees There are ete'- esesse teoriege 3een was mens w ser not seuing the NRL maanaps o i
He is e 463 tehaer el nacie8e Power Iach esad a Baclear taastry grBS In a reteN gessa mat tirade
,anuy 2 ethere tmerr eenstrue* mavadanne ser as cuarmee tia la ennemos a winued anew -whar 1
has eseeareship the NRC is taamg peps "le preserve tank Dia grewmg eatety semens pede ameshents he has eder* We're hayWS ts that we wiH hate j
th= =rmensa =-sy atan
,su,ure,da,,,,,, e,,,4,o unpre,*= mm =., og g, e,It u,e,,lat,.,But we,.
t ofw ed==aar=ana5.rmdu yc o
m K. ASSELSTWICs A morneer einee SEL saaresasues et aeona im enre^
W some say me presasumi and Aaaetmee has erwetaped me repeasteen as the NRC g,, h.o.s, mad the ears at me team.
sneverica one treguency and weredy disagrees maa
,,g,,,,ug,,,,,y,,,,,,,g,,
- RE31GNATION OF A KE) the panel e unagerity armaera He e apen M leu maley wea. the NRC. un the name nuansen by knagmg to a peepes F'CDEJt.AL OF71CIAL. The eists Genemmg me e empmge W has e el regulatory referia,and e.LR wtus have outlear power expop of the New Yert effice of sne F>
ned hver **a=='-
ima sw sus aseg
,epigge,n,, gu,sa,gggggangs,g,,,e,c,a,m,,d inay es prendiatry, dereg Emergency hiamageme g
g,em,ir,e,,a,n,gw met uus becagranus nes ensch re,wwe au m.m Of aewscary of geoerstmera regulatase af the eauem 5 1
cmer l
tim pesmestag arehmary self-rep a lhe esmfluessam o greatest ammet. esussrgwery twecustiert D& ant save I"H"e"e"nasn'*u"s'" mas me NRC 9ee teing tse valing toletsea, and tacally peaeseg une "These penpas aren't tran@t se he was prem. red to resign after e
attemmedste concerns of the Stedmad Poetr flaa i tsem ed isumme answe h argw um me empare asunde twuseg to drop a esotenre tam 7-me ene"T"h"is esmagases hellowes ita lth IB le prm88 Se g w symy how maganer peeper
- pad Wultasa erttaelsad as evacualtoe drW se use Sam $ ares." Say Une edmare of g Direak a terneer tse teRC affleted $horemem mEhBar plant est Lafi$
g r
stry ased est me peteL* We
- f= a Asae6-sewusster perhaned Dy me Jegp eque e ledaat M V The effectat Frana P m-e 4 m as waerme wem me m"aans"gw Peaclear tsuermatose asas Ra,meses Energ,se certa ter me Alanur mate em.
Fenst en emmary grang Parme. asad has agersey was pres S, arm.e.e, e.#as,u,egte,n gren ee
. - * * = - =
. =d=r mas la,B c,.stae.gtee "They were. meet.gy ha.assa e.ffa
==n= =. e==== = iau a =r-e =d asse r h.no -.e a a.use a.,.
e,,,. n,a ews -
es
.s ou e
,se n re one
==
Ma r= = rrsw==
m
.u res-e i-Oe88 89u6
-iden WRC esers, hu==e= a-new es,eneace = ual me.
- wmzaR uAa:Lrry: sa e tem 6 're Islangg me MM Amtem em 8 e
ja the Smiale Em1rernem este Pubest PW m guth MuhsEC.
4 they fe esil gtsaltfled le Same swttet that IS le suur wttA Une to lirerta attu em haa jurisoimin ww a*
sneameen to remeter emmen mas > spinne respuessa "
clear enemary's panatast the NRC s'ese* power assises He had ease hred nevere) legal Gareassume end em>sey sacerneng NRC ernace pasms le the huusah mee fevere usatsg the uuhas'y e Jeen ese the NRC aos as heena es asseass paars referin as meet es esaassaang ei-hg feafnpen of how the apuery hamelity far w
- at powet Assessee. E. Is a Virgsma maes** less term n tena to tima er and pensar partic& tas fevered une musear sammary-psamaa se sat taussa T1us cmeum Pine aest Jesu-Petasa m 20 litenset6 protest" B4Cm se em une WRC weied seemse for a worte ao es=enessar aae meansied na nase se tecanos" - of manana== since ime ascer This fyTO ef tee @ lalE deeml Be NRC sianaelme taagey tr anges muB alameuty lee was passes a t0 t
eenne caly f ree se&&-seteear le ptass harewara desagn epperen wom e ngu eunama tikaa, 3
aft 3Mnh eam& The mee ruse repare ire The NRC had eriglaa#7 stepen-
..e j
Vener CEtamry, a sewer NRC NRC le geese thes mere wtB to ed esvisuted habuity. a pundlem
'I.4 sammeer wease terne empeed a "euestaetial tesaE3 **d astery amares ey eennsmer and enosnus JtmL retenay IMd 8 W
' hauntRs" tuseere erewug talary menad
'.-.j e
haanne mas me asumey has eene e
Q M.V'% F"h O N
. et samos psessa
-U N$!NG REFORAI The e
a d=t ("t d
CO
- l..
a-an, Aanga IBUsG es enay apprewtag psam ascwasma ses.asum K mv.i isee..a_one = n e a.iuy v s NBC menerts a legasa mas
=
men _a nee.une.se e.ne==
am p==u se_e_ne eu y no o
ers. NRC nam 6 s
--eumcur=w Berythaa ese 8,,,,,,sye,,en,sa,,tt,ee the N.R,C.De.P.eer.ge mate.d,a n.d es.ag: "ns eemetag $s,.t.es.s.n. runs twe<s.ag ggg j
g r.cosmeca ns.
.r p
ane s,
- a..
- e. n a.e - - - - - -
a e_
. e.se.
fermer $eL H88888 08# gg g,gamase and a Perieuseespersarg==-n==e ms====
meneresse marcsi eswa one pesa anses ter.anmar.emad emenatur dissummEry and ph78hE8 7"
,g gg pgyayety g6 Gtimmay neuB is ab eMarmeW leeere asubeegndasMe af 13e me tage af heare m amar reac1ere
.8E F88Feliy Weeta 6 Imme bem esser enhetry -
Im3 esfs eart recurWA WW 8'b ndichage& gnactalIEWS lE #'8E88", payees'& 943 te taum 6 LtR te ve tirenesse of UW espas e
~ masster W t Pallesans esed he PesE me bets-taa safety. eartan IAe La Ama Arter.98 s' amme W the teneur-le'entrT and a greater eacsumeasun rig nape was eronas en ps emese eme.re gaddet 8
pnsrtama tasums ter see teat-planernas&
dufer le tee eststry art $ adB and datlping
- inne a eregulaaery 4WE emid add "WGff and mandans and *** hassims one ne served Ove yeen es me umarwiv R**"*'
""h"a""$ ten 1 a'8' bed. a e het a psesa " '**-* *** **"t B Dre easety.
Safety Casnadaes e** "W U8'4887 a
- saaewr as me u_una mne e
- "8 d
ana erweral gruge ans one NRC ettterest oppreetm." to este C-
_d'""-._-araer.re_se,ar,ce._ie
_oc r.e._are.an_ esse.sse aMWW.e.
C_NVIROpenstWTaL QU ALIF1.
masessmer may see cfhassees part...p.. o.uas _ths.ee s.t.eam w
"There E
as m.ue_w
.__r r_
p e t.-
r_._. _.
o_
y....-e......
p
_._.a,-.e,.
l
-y e 7s_ _.
_.e._.
_.,,. _ e_.m _...
.. e.
r
- e.
a-a____
,,._a.____.._.-y
_._ -a..._._
y
..e.r_._._.__.m_4._._.._._...
ms-r= _d,
..s.
p.t.-
re.__ _.a_.
_e.
t p
.y.
.a.,.__e.._-. _
_ C _ _-
.m. _._,e e.
_e,.
_ _. _._-._t__.re ___ __e_
.e
~.__..
e.e _ _ _
y as=:_.
y.
.e_.
e
_._,y_.
r.
C.
G 7.. T,~ h,, a.,tmi e
ad- -
- --'ls"~e'~
Rowley man meets NRC offeicial e
_er
.e,anty e e _. --, - - -
., a
,,apr, _y _ _a.nd._,___.oe e s_. m. = =e Ca e,
or,
.or Ra agasset,te aL CA89s 18 emunrmed W.* 5,",*
,,,e e,,,e,3.,.,RC,,ar -
see mes mese amu u mes Pres >
C ta=7 amis-===
ate. C.a_rf.eul 98,N._##**Ee - -
a-gg u n,
Democratar esas lume by derest "*._,,i,a.ne
- 8"'.#80*"
.,, e,.m s, e..e.r.ess pC.alise..ren,, - ses_citred be se,pmem Rasga a-se de
.ee No e
-= a e.r.o -
o- -
lar7 e_meu,messag past sasamnnesama -
g g,,
,en ne go nee a amese uw heaerens meat ghanNwmaeJ Palladabh leag g Whes' he foured tre 88 g, gg,,
Ate (388 *'E NIU M8
- Je 8 in ee8"8 8**8
- Car,y was empay s'R 88I3'u'm"U"*S
- " $ pe.Amessasse and yeus"ere's'y s' hee"*r
- "s*ev*e*=*'h'e 'e RC Seewww Nw_aemassansat M uhD CarnaeT em yw E
kand ed t
s Hemk
.,.,.N.ee,,,e.,,,,,,a, a.i-,a -au~ ;.,,e,,,,.,,,Nedear Pfepul8'eE b'Itn' '8 8 9**,g,,
.,e_.a.
- P,e R.a.- a,_-',ma sar e memo ennes amesessme d led say he fevere
=
,.r_, ame so. C-_y. ee.,
.e.s.=d.e e
a,
tesek,gg gymnas owenas.a-.
s.
et, e..e e..
Cde_.
I 9I O tBn3 B 9 88 @
8 enanshrrafIDs Atlantar M W'One y gag gg,g pg 3 eerTled and naag Uteresfu sassen Aaa
,gg gp M9EMO *#
, a, gar,,;,,,3,i,rt;*,,.u.e "lun,'J' ",'O d.er.a.he e atma what omaig stappen Le he rega tam M e
.oe- - = " - - - ~ ~
==-a-0 f0P q_
l
I 069 3
gt4@ @ g6 Embargoed for release Sunday, O
August 24.
press contact:
Stephen B. Comley The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100, ext.1517 (Attention editors: The statement below was issued in Washington today by Stephen B. Comley, a Sading opponent of the Seabrook, N.H., Nuc!' ear Power Plant, following his meeting with dissident NRC commissioner James K. Asselstine and other Washington officials critical of decisions made by the NRC commission majority. Comley feels an obligation to share the conclusions he has reached from these meetings, some public but most private.)
"It is time to give up on nuclear power plants -
building them is too costly, operating them is too dangerous and disposing of their waste is too problematic.
"At the 100 nuclear power plants licensed in America, we have not yet suffered our first death despite many accidents
-- most minor, some scary such as the announced ' incident' at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania.
b
,g Ily
b EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE "After two weeks in Washington to relay the concerns of my neighbors in northeast Massachusetts about the nearby Seabrook, N.H., plant, I have become convinced that nuclear power plants are a catastrophe waiting to happen.
"We should not wait for our first death, we should not wait for our first catastrophe; we should close our nuclear plants now.
"I have spoken with experts at the Nuclear Regulatory Agency as well as administrative and congressional aides.
Privately, they have shared their concerns with me; publicly, they have not raised their voices in opposition to the nuclear power industry, leading me to conclude that this industry's power is as much political as it is nuclear.
"One exception is Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) member James K. Asselstine, whose courageous and frequent dissents are the only disconsonant notes heard among the pro-industry harmony from the other commissioners.
"Asselstine, a former attorney for the Senate Environment and Pulic Works Committee, spoke to me of concerns about the chances for 'a severe accident.'
"Asselstine added that 'no U.S. utility at the present time is prepared to commit to build a new nuclear power plant.' That is so because of the exorbitant cost to build new plants and the catastrophic dangers in operating them.
"Those plants already in operation annually produce 1,500, i
i
'{D
O EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE metrJc_ tone af wneta that will remain daneerously radioactive for hundreds and perhaps thousands of years. And nnhndv knnwe what tn do with it.
"! do. Let's phase out nuclear power plants as the only practical way to chase out the problems - the financial problems of the cast and the present, and the horrific potential problems of the future."
e 4
0 I.
t t
Ill
O Embargoed for release Sunday, Aug. 24 press contact:
Stephen B. Comley l
The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100 WASHINGTON - President Reagan has been invited to join the anti-nuclear power plant movement by a Massachusetts businessman and leading opponent of the controversial Seabrook, N.H., Nuclear Power Plant.
In a letter to the President (editors: see attached),
Rowley, Mass., nursing home owner / administrator Stephen B.
Comley asked that the Seabrook not be granted a license and that the 100 licensed. plants be phased out.
In releasing the letter, Comley explained to the media:
"I am angry.
" Angry that a plant such as Seabrook, or.any nuclear power plant, can have such a profound effect on our
]
future and the future of unborn generations.
"I am angry that we are offered no say in something that affects us all so greatly."
As an example of the insensitivity that Comley says i
l
A Ph EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE angers him, he points to a letter (see attached) from Carl Walske, president of the Atomic Industrial Forum. The letter was written to Nuclear Regulatory Commission member James K.
Asselstine, who frequently has criticized the commission majority as a " protector of the nuclear industry."
In the letter, Wal'ke attacks Asselstine for warning of a s
"possible" nuclear power plant accident in the U.S. of the L
dimensions of April 26 accident at Chernobyl in the Soviet Union. "The cress and the layman will not understand the subtle difference between the words 'possible' and
' probable,'" Walske writes Asselstine.
J Comley accuses Walske of insulting the intelligence of the American public, and calls on the President to take sides with the public.
Comley also asks the President to support dissident NRC commissioner Asselstine, who has been is the object of criticism for his opposition to many of the plans of the nuclear power industry. Says Comley:
"I think the people we should be criticizing are the, commission majority, which has been responsible for licensing the unsafe nuclear power plants now in operation.
Their irresponsible, inhumane attitude is deplorable."
AU Comley asks the President to urge Congress to take the following steps:
"1. Take NRC member Asseltine's warnings on the dang,ers o
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE of nuclear power plants seriously.
"2. Order a moratoriun on the licensing of any additional nuclear power plants and a study on how the unsafe plants now in op. oration can be phased out with the least threat of danger and disruption of service.
"3. Create a commission to investigate fully the NRC to determine how the nuclear power industry was able to proceed so far without closer scrutiny."
Comley concluded with this statement:
"Mr. President, I recommend that the will of the people be eiven back to them.
"All of the information that the NRC has been suppressing must be brough to light so that the American public can make the informed judgments that is their right.
O t
Ii4
~. _ - -.
i O
O-.
We, the atizens of anaer, w==
-tts you, amala seacan, the,
~
President of' the Chited States,"to address.the following codcerns and mg - +Mations that we, the undersigned, have.WJ.nq the Ncclear Regulatory
/
C nmiasion, a Federal Agency that has the ability to license the Seabrook.m. :;.s Nuclear Plant that is located in Seabrcnk, New Haneshire but involves varicus
,<:l town in. Massachusetts har-ance of the ld mile radius.
'Ihe reasons for our ccncerns are these:
A.
Our childe ' live two miles outside the ten mile radius but attend
.a raginn=1 ar-knni inaida the, ten mile radius. We have been told
.j
'"that we cannot.be part of the evacuation plannig.' 'Ihis also, 9
applies to the r**idants of Sea View Nbraig Bcme who are transferred
~
to a hospital Iccated iM*= the ten mile radius.
B.
% Euding the P= dial @ r'al h.g q Response Plan, Draft 3 4/86
" 0.2-2 which says "only those hospital patients and nursing
)
hme residents who are deemed =adic=11y safe to nove are to be evacuated.
. l
'! hose patients /raafdant= which cannot be' evacuated should be sheltered in -
placa."
(a mpy is aneln=ad) m In our opinion this not only affects nursing hcme and hosoital residents but it could affect anycne who had an.operaticn and had to be sheltered in place that day.
C.
We feel that the nr: lear Regulatory m=insion has been negligent in not making th*="=alves available and not "=1147 us or beine um on the issues in our town.
It seems that they have represented the nuclear industry very well but they have not m m W the input of the pecple that may not he for nuclear power or have concerns for safety in our area.-
Thus, we the citizens of Rowley, Pa==arkn=etts rw.r-4:
A.
'Ihat you set up a Ccmnissicn to see if t$
Nuclear Regulatory Camissicn.
is acting r+=i-44Mly in 4senting and saying that the safety and concerns are being sply addressed for the pecole of Bowley as well as people across this country.
B.
'Ihat you ask for a neratorium on the start up of any new nuclear plants awaiting licenses until you and we can be assured that we have the full information back fzcm hhyl to make a resconsible decision to whether we should continue thinking that nuclear pcwer is a safe alternative.
C.
'Ihat you remind the Nuclear Regulatory Cmmission that this is America not Russia and they are hired by the people and are accountable to the people, not just the people in the nuclear inan=+ y.
We were reminded cn the 4th of July of what this country was fourded for and we thank you for that. We are seeing that our.O.=ed.zw of speech and freeden Q
of chnica is being exercised.
I Acars wrm E ABC7E REASCtB AND REMEMTICNS.....
i
\\((
l
\\.O Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc.
O 7101 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda. MD 20814-4805 Telephone: (301) 654-9250 TWX 7108249602 ATOMIC FOR OC l
Carl Walsk e President May 29, 1986 s
The Honorable James K. Asselstine U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.,
lith Floor Washington, DC 20555
Dear Commissioner Asselstine:
Your May 22, 1986', testimony before Mr. Markey's House Energy Conservation and Power Subcommittee has been widely misinter-preted in the public arena.
Specifically, I refer to your given the present level of safety being statement, achieved by the operating nuclear power plants in this country, we can expect to see a core meltdown accident within the next 20 years, and it is yossible that such an accident could result in off-site releases of radiation which are as large as, or larger than, the releases estimated to have occurred at Chernobyl."
We feel this misinterpretation is the result of your loose juxtaposition of an earlier NRC. staff 45% core melt estimate by the end of the century and your conjecture that larger than Chernobyl. releases are "possible."
We feel that the matter is of vital importance.
As a senior public official you are certainly aware that your remarks (Thepressandthelaymanwillnotvis-a-vis nuclear plant-safety will be widely dissem h
understand the subtle g) [ difference between the words "possible" and " probable.",/
Our own technical position -
predicated on the 5 year, $20 million IDCOR study -- is that the NRC staff's earlier 45% core melt estimate is conservatively high.
The staff has taken-historic averages from previous studies and-projected them two
(~
decades into the future without accounting for improvements
\\
taking place and others which will evolve as nuclear technology improves in-the coming years.
'i ll&
)
e Commissioner Asselstine May 29, 1986 Most importantly, risk is not equivalent to core melt probabil-ity.
It is not technically correct that any core melt accident at a U.S. reactor would yield Chernobyl-like consequences which your statement implies.
The TMI accident i s evidence enough to prove that point.
Given a core melt, the probability of a containment bypass release is less than one in two hundred.
With our reactors IDCOR does not find any such releases as serious as Chernobyl apparently was.
Thus, the implication in your statement exag-gerates the risk from U.S. reactors by at least a factor of two hundred.
The above arguments.suggest that nuclear energy is a very safe means of supplying the electricity that the U.S. economy requires.
Sincerely, CW:spg e
0 0
i:
ff0f" I
y AUGUST 19,1986-10:00 A.!
press contact:
Stephen B. Comley The Sheraton Grand (202) 628-2100, ext. 1517 WASHINGTON - A Massachusetts businessman with a fistful of petitions, press clippings and appointments with high government officials hopes to land a fatal blow on the Seabrook, N.H., nuclear power plant. The $4.6 billion. plant has been mired in controversy and cost overruns since its inception more than a decade ago.
Stephen B. Comley lives 12 miles from the plant in Rowley, Mass., where he runs a nursing home. He is in the nation's capital to
~
fight the plant hith petitions signed by 65 percent of Rowley's 2,200 registered voters.
A petition already has been hand delivered to Mass. Gov.
Michael S. Dukakis and acted upon by the Rowley Board of Selectman.
It calls for Rowley to be part of an evacuation plan in case of an accident at Seabrook.
Comley plans to present, in person, another petition to President Reagan. It calls for the President to:
"ask for a moratorium on the startup of any new nuclear plants awaiting licenses until you and we can be assured that we have the full information back from Chernoby! to make a responsible decison to whether we should continue :hinking that nuclear power is a safe alternative.
AUGUST 19,1986-10:00 A.M.
" set up a commission to see if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is acting responsibly in representing and saying that the safety and concerns are being properly addressed for the people of Rowley as well as people accross this country."
Comley points out that, in case of an accident at Seabrook, the NRC has no plans for hospital patients that cannot be moved and have to be sheltered, including children and our elders. And, among those who would be evacuated, students at a high school within 10 miles of the plant would be separated from their parents' outside the 10-mile evacuation radius. Comley questions whether these oversights are part of a pattern resulting from the NRC's haste to please the nuclear power industry.
At present, the nuclear plant at Seabrook still has not been brought on-stream. The latest' delay has come not from the NRC' but another federal agency, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. It ordered fuel loading and low-power testing at the plant delayed for hearings on concerns over the plant's control room and other safety issues.
In October, shortly af ter those hearings are expected to be concluded, hearings on a full-power license for the plant tentatively are scheduled to begin.
Q Comley's press clippings from area newspapers show continuing, widespread opposition to. the plant. For instance, five of the six Massachusetts communities within the 10-mile evacuation zone
, around the plant are seeking to delay further the plant's start-up by i
llQ
5h G9 AUGUST 19,1986-10:00 A.M.
refusing to take part in NRC-mandated evacuation planning.
Communities outside the 10-mile evacuation radius, such as Rowley, while seeking to delay or kill the plant through petitions, have asked to be part of any evacuation plan.
On Friday, Aug.13, Comley met with NRC commissioner James K.
Asseitine. Since then, he has met with other NRC officiais and White House aides. Comley hopes to meet with the President to present the petitions.
Comley says that he wants the President to understand that the campaign to halt Seabrook is for all of the American people. "Because we care... about Rowley, about you," is the campaign's motto.,
PAGE 3 of 3 0
t
IO w
ASO%o UNITED STATES O'{:f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION S
WASHINGTON. D.C. 2055S
.* g
"[
July 15, 1986 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Mr. Carl Walske, President Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc.
7101 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814-4805
Dear Mr. Walske:
Thank you for your letter of May 29, 1986, regarding my May 22, 1986 testimony before the Energy Conservation and Power Subcomittee of the House Committee on Energy and Comerce.
In your letter, you expressed concern that my statement may have been misinterpreted in the public arena.
In particular, you point to my statement that "... given the present level of safety being achieved by the operating nuclear power plants in this country, we can expect to see a core meltdown accident within the next 20 years, and it is possible that such an accident could' result in off-site releases of radiation which are as large as, or larger than, the releases estimated to have occurred at Chernobyl." You state that the Atomic Industrial Forum does not agree with my characterization of the likelihood of a core meltdown in this country within the next 20 years, and it is the
' position of the AIF that, even if there were to be a core meltdown, the probability of a substantial release of radioactive materials is very low (i.e., one substantial release in 200 core meltdowns).
I stand by my statement before the Energy Conservation and Power Subcom-mittee.
I believe that it represents an accurate' and balanced assessment of the risk posed by the 100 operating nuclear po'werplants in this country.
I have provided my rationale for the views contained in my statement. before the Subcomittee in various forums in the past.
However, since you have taken issue with my statement I want to take this opportunity to explain my position in detail.
I share your concern for accuracy.
I recall reading in the newspapers in recent months statements by senior officials within the nuclear industry that our plants are " perfectly safe" and we "will not have a Chernobyl-type plant accident here." Apparently, such absolute statements are thought to be needed to counter-balance arguments from the other side that there is an imediate threat to the public which requires the shutdown of our nuclear plants.
In my view, neither position is accurate.
To convey an impression that Chernobyl-type releases are impossible in this country is as inaccurate as conveying an impression that a similar disaster is a certainty.
I attempted to take the middle road in my opening statement before the Subcommittee.
We do not fully understand the risks of nuclear power, and we should not be fearful of saying so.
~
Your letter contained a number of specific criticisms of my statement.
First~, you stated that the NRC staff's 45 percent core meltdown estimate over the next 20 years does not take into account safety inprovements now 1
b
9 you quoted only a part of my statement. What I said just before the statement quoted in your letter was:
Third, although we believe that all of our reactors have some capsbility to withstand severe core meltdown accidents, the extent to which they can withstand such accidents depends upon the sequence of events during the accident, the individual plant designs and the manner in which each plant is operated and maintained.
While we hope that their occurrence is unlikely, there are accident sequences for U.S. plants that can lead to rupture or bypassing of the containment in U.S. reactors which would result in the off-site release of fission products comparable to or worse than the releases estimated by the NRC staff to have taken place during the Chernobyl accident. That is why the Comission told the Congress recenti y that it could not rule out a l
comercial nuclear power plant accident in the United States resulting in tens of bi.llions of dollars in property lesses and injuries to the public.
Thus, my statement made the point that not all core meltdown accidents can be expected to result in large offsite releases of radiation which can harm the public and contaminate large areas of land and property.
The central questions, of course, are:
how likely is such an accident, what are the uncertainties in estimating the probabilities, and how well do we under-stand this risk? Your letter can be interpreted very easily by the uninitiated to say that the reactor H sks are well understood and that an accident involving substantial and harmful releases of radioactivity to the environment is all but impossible in this country.
That clearly is not an accurate representation of the facts.
Your letter stated that "With our reactors IDCOR does not find any such releases as serious as Chernobyl apparently was."
I question whether there is a sound scientific basis for this conclusion.
The 1975 Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400), which the industry and the NRC touted as an objective assessment of reactor risk ~, contains several release categories associated with core meltdowns that are equal to or greater than our estimates of the j
releases at Chernobyl.
The NRC staff has recently advised the Commission l
that the best available information suggests that some changes in specific radionuclide group releases to the atmosphere are justified; however, the overall consequences are not significantly different from those using source terms contained in the Reactor Safety Study.
Thus, the best available information indicates that severe accidents with Chernobyl-type releases, or worse, can occur at U.S. plants.
The question then becomes:
how likely are such accidents and what are the uncertainties in estimating their probabilities?
In my view, two con-clusions regarding the Reactor Safety Study are germane to this question.
C' First, the uncertainties in reactor risks are much larger than estimated in that 1975 report, even with all of the research and analyses that have been A
completed since then.
Second, the bottom-line results of quantitative probabilistic risk assessments are not reliable.
I thought there was a general recognition of these conclusions, but your letter seeins to indicate a belief that we can now make sweeping generalizations about the low b
(
hC O radiation releases.
Given the best available scientific information to date and recognizing the substantial uncertainties which still exist regarding these issues, I believe we are still a long way from making defensible generalizations about releases from core meltdowns.
You stated that the implication of my statement " exaggerates the risk from U.S. react' ors by at least a factor of two hundred." However~, you assertion fails to take into account all potentially significant contributors to risk, all potentially significant core meltdown phenomena, a reasonable range of technically defensible parametric values for calculating containment performance during core meltdowns, all potentially significant accident sequences; the effects of human error or design and construction errors, the effects of materials degradation with age, and si.gnificant operating events, including so-called precursors to core meltdown accidents.
According to WASH-1400, there are many accident scenarios that can lead to substantial releases, including a small break loss of coolant with failure of the containment sprays, an interfacing systems loss of coolant (i.e., an accident involving overpressurization of low pressure piping that is outside.of the containment but'is connected to the high pressure primary cooling piping such that the loss of coolant occurs outside of the con-tainment rather than the design basis loss of coolant inside containment),
anticipated transients without. scram, station blackout, and loss of coolant accidents with failure of emergency core cooling injection.
The specific release category that results from these scenarios is dependent on core meltdown phenomena and containment response thereto.
While much progress has been made in understanding these accident scenarios since WASH-1400 was published in 1975, there remain very substantial uncertainties in evalu-ating them.
For example, during a core meltdown, theoretical source term calculations include models for plating out of significant quantities of fission products within the primary system. However, the models do not evaluate, or poorly evaluate, the effects of the heating of the primary system by the plated-out fission products to determine whether this phenomenon' alters the sequence of events and the release category.
As I mentioned before, steam explosions and their effects on containment and resuspension of fission products are still in dispute.
These are just two examples of the many uncertainties and unknowns.regarding the release categories which could result from various core meltdown sequences. With regard to the likelihood of the various sequences, for the reasons given above, I would say that none of the sequences can be ruled out.
A number of precursor events have occurred at U.S. reactors for each of the above scenarios.
The broad conclusions in your letter seem to be based substantially, if not O
exc1usiveir. oa the tocoa pro 9re".
unfortunately, that program examined only a few plants.
The nuclear industry eschewed standardization in such areas as plant design, construction, operations, maintenance and surveillance testing.
Thus, each operating plant has its own unique vulnerabilities to core meltdown accidents and to substantial releases of radioactivity.
This fact, together with the substantial uncertainties inherent in these types of theoretical analyses and the li,mited number of
.f
M&
O design of each plant, including a verification of the adequacy of the existing design basis for the plant and a review of all changes made to the plant after the approval of the plant's original design basis.
Given the absence of standardization in the U.S. nuclear program and the lack of good configuration control at some plants, this step is necessary to assure that all significant design problems are identified and corrected.
l Second, we should undertake improvement programs in areas of demonstrated weakness in U.S. nuclear powerplant operations, including management, human performance, equipment reliability, and maintenance and surveillance testing.
Despite the existence of voluntary industry efforts in several of these areas, we are still seeing U.S. plant performance that is substan-tially below the levels of safety and reliability being achieved in other countries such as Japan, Sweden, and West Germany.
U.S. operating experi-ence demonstrates that existing voluntary efforts simply are not doing the job.
We need expanded efforts in each of these areas sufficient to ensure a level of performance at U.S. plants which is equal to that now being achieved in these other ccuntries.
Of these areas, it appears that management is the dominant factor in achieving excellen'ce in performance.
We need to focus particular attention on those plants with a history of poor operating performance and reliability.
The industry's Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) has been in operation now for more than six years. Although INP0 has had a positive effect in improving overall industry perfonnance, there are still far too many plants that fail to meet acceptable standards of performance.
This indicates either that strong peer pressure within the industry is still not being applied to the poor performers'or that peer pressure alone is not sufficient to bring about effective and lasting improvement.
In either case, further regulatory initiatives are needed, especially for the weak performers.
In addition, those members of the industry with more expertise and better performance
- should provide more help to the weaker performers.
The industry itself must become more aggressive in ensuring exemplary performance of all nuclear utilities.
After all, the future of the best managed facility may rest in the hands of the worst managed.
I want to emphasize that I am not l
seeking perfection in U.S. nuclear power plant operations.
What I am seeking is a level of operational performance by the U.S. plants that i
equals the level of performance being routinely achieved by the plants in such countries as Japan, Sweden and West Germany.
I am convinced that this is an achievable objective, and we in government and you in the industry should dedicate ourselves to meeting this goal within the next three years.
Third, we should undertake a detailed study of additional design features, such as a dedicated decay heat removal system and a filtering / venting system for containments which have the ability to reduce substantially the p
likelihood of a core meltdown and the potential for a large off-site V
release of radioactivity.
Such design features have already been installed or are being actively pursued by several European countries with aggressive nuclear programs.
These design improvements for existing, as well as for future plants, are being accomplished in a disciplined manner at reasonable cost. We should, therefore, give specific attention to those designs which
, already exist or are under active developraent in other countries.
Any such h'
[
NI O
~
a program that will assure the long-term protection of the public and that will restore public confidence in the NRC and in nuclear power.
Sincerely, i
n
/}-. f 9
James X. Asselstine i
i I
i t
6 J
I l
4 O
2 V
-f r
lh i
~
o Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc.
fs 7101 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda MD 20814-4805 Telephor.a: (301) 654-9260 TWX 7108249602 ATOMIC FOR OC Carl Walske President i
May 29, 1986 The Honorable James K. Asselstine i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.,
lith Floor Washington, DC 20555
Dear Commissioner Asselstine:
Your May 22, 1986, testimony before Mr. Markey's House Energy Conservation and Power Subcommittee has been widely misinter-preted in the public arena.
Specifically, I refer to your given the present level of safety being statement, achieved by the operating nuclear power plants in this country, we can expect to see a core meltdown accident within the next 20 years, and it is possible that such an accident could result in off-site releases of radiation which are as large as, or larger than, the releases estimated to have occurred at Chernobyl."
We feel this misinterpretation is the result of your loose juxtaposition of an earlier NRC staff 45% core melt estimate by the end of the century and your conjecture that larger than Chernobyl. releases are "possible."
We feel that the matter is of vital importance.
As a senior public official you are certainly awar.e that your remarks vis-a-vis nuclear plant safety will be widely disseminated.
The press and the layman will not understand the subtle difference between the words "possible" and " probable."
Our own technical position -
predicated on the 5 year, $20 million IDCOR study -- is that the NRC staf f's earlier 45% core melt estimate is conservatively high.
The staff has taken historic averages from previous studies and projected them two decades into the future without accounting for improvements
()
taking place and others which vill evolve as nuclear technology improves in the coming years.
4.
f I
~
il o
9 August 22, 1986 i
Commissioner Zech United States Nuclear Resource Council 1717 H Street,'N.W.
Washington, DC 20555
Dear Commissioner Zech:
Enclosed are the questions that were posed to Mr.
Asseltine on August 15, 1986 for which written answers were provided on Tuesday, August 19th, 1986.
I expect to be meeting with.the President soon and would like to have your responses to these questions.
Sincerely, Stephen Coml'ey
()
d.
f f3 V
j g
August 22, 198'6 i
Commissioner Roberts United States Nuclear Resource Council 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20555
Dear Commissioner Roberts:
.,. Enclosed are. the. questions that were posed to Mr.
c,o Asseltine,on-August 15, 1986 for which written answers were provided on Tuesday, August 19th, 1986.
I expect to be meeting with the President soon and would like to have your responses to these questions.
Sincerely,
- - Stephen Comley
.O i.
j
s o
// C
?
August 22, 1986 Commissioner Cat.-
United' States Nuclear Resource Council 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20555
Dear Commissioner Carr:
Enclosed are the questions that were posed to Mr.
Asseltine on August 15, 1986 for which written answers were provided on Tuesday, August 19th, 1986.
I expect to be meeting with the President soon and would like to have your responses to these questions.
Sincerely, Stephen Comley
()
l i
l i-I
n o
//D August 22, 1986 Commissioner Bernthal United States Nuclear Resource Council 1717 H Street, N.W.
,f p washington, DC 20555 pp/#
Dear Commissioner Bernthal:
(Q fl0 Enclosed are the questions that were osed to Mr.
Asseltine on August 15, 1986 for which written answers were provided on Tuesday, August 19th, 1986.
I expect
' to be meeting with the President soon and would like to have your responses to these questions.
Sincerely, Stephen Comley O
h
II 6 o
Appointment with Mr. James K. Asseltine, a commissioner at the NRC.
Appointment August 15.at 3:15 pm.
NRC Office 1717 H Street, NW lith Floor Washington, DC 1.
Do you feel that the people of Rowley should have a voice in evacuation planning as it pertains to the Seabrook power plant?
2.
Evacuation issue - people who can't be moved... Do you feel some means should be provided for people who cannot be moved, other for than merely being sheltered?
3.
Location issue - Seabrook.
Has the summer beach population been fully taken into consideration?
4.
As we have yet to receive all of the information on Chernobyl, what are your opinions on reducing the radius from 10 miles to 2 miles?
5.
I understand that the low level licensing requirements have been reduced as they pertain to issues of evacuation problems that may arise in a city or town.
This change has enabled questions not to be resolved before a license is issued.
Given the Chernobyl incident and the problems and questions surrounding the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plymouth (which has been branded "the worst-run plant in the US"), do you think we should reverse again and require that evaluation issues be resolved before a low level license is granted to any new plants?
6.
Do you feel that the NRC has represented the people as well as it has represented the nuclear industry?
l 7.
Has Chernobyl changed your thinking regarding nuclear power?
8.
Do you feel that people are really informed about and know of the dangers of nuclear power?
9.
Cost verus other funds - obsolete?
{}
10.
How many people were hospitalized in Russia?
11.
.How old was the plant - 3 years?
g y
llf o
12.
What are the differences between the Russian plants and our nuclear plants as you see them?
13.
Regardiang future generations, would you recommend that we continue to build nuclear plants?
14.
Do you feel that the public would be justified in believing that the NRC is not acting in the public's best interest?
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, Stephen Comley SC:ds d
9
'.O
- V i
.. :~
.~
August 22, -1986
.. ~ ' -"
~
'~
Coin.ni's,si'orisF S'ech'. " '
. United States. Nuclear Resource' Council
. ;,.717"H f S treeti. :N:.W.' a.i. 5 r'+".. *
'.'*<..i-.- --:'
..A.>-
~
Wasnin'g'to'n,- DC'" 20553 '
- DeO 'ComntissfonerrZech't..
....e
.?94.l W: e &'.;yS!pir7.p;Wy;..f.%3 w,'. N.;. 0e d. l <;gr.<.:...
f<. x. = '- ;:t
.. g.
..,.g.g~
- ..e.;,;.,,. ;,,....,.g.
.En.a.id. s e~d... a. rez.'-th.e.'. qu. e. s t. i.on. s that'. V. dre ' pos e,.,to./ Mr...
d..
c
,.:. -e
' A.sseltir.fe4.6.n Augus.t.e 1. 5, :1986 f.or.4. hi. ch 'Wri.tten. an.sw'ers 7 7. '..
. s..W4.r 6 ','p rov..i.de'dl, on'.T.ue. sd. a
.',2. A..u ust..1.9 t. h.,.19$6.
I e'x ec.t-
. ~
e
-..t' h'g : wi..t.h L.the':.P Re'sid ent. s'oon, a' rid. 'W.oill. d :1ike.to..
..J.. :, ;
' ;.. ^-
t.o.'be. l m. s..
e
- h. a. ve
- ' y'o.u.t. -responses.to. r t,he's e' qu,e.,st. io...ris..'.', W-
^, ', * * ~
lx.
i j
,,s.
..7 a,
. S in ce.r.ely,-
g
.....r..
4.
1 S te, phen,..Cobile.....,
y l
s 1
l n
p 4
N.
.i
9 4
(
~
August 22,.1986 ~
4 Commissioner Roberts
...c.,-
Unit.e.d. State's. Nuclear R'esource,Co.uncil
.. 1. 7. 1.. H. S tree.ti..N.W..
- P....
- : Wa' shin....... ' 6C 2~o5:55..,
. ggonl
~ '. -
~
.c.
.. i,..
.. v.
y
Dear Comm'issioner'.Robdrts :
..i...
m.
-...t s.
- .[j?@Se-9e;?tJ.?l'd gggggyrfggg~tifi,Kffu'inti%hiD[tiih6,'wel.yp6ded
- Mgr..Erf aca'{.r. '.INPch.
i Ass.eltine.o. n. August! 1 5,-'1 9 8 6.. f.or.'which' wri.tten' ' answers..
i.were. provided.. on.; Tuesday;. August.:19 th, J.'1986~.....I(expect.
~
e' s
. t.d' ;be... m. e,,e t..is.. g..w..i.'th..'. t. h. '.P. r e.'. id.,e.n. t. ~, s.oori. in.d,..w.'o'u ld.lik. e to':
+
. ~ ~
' haye.yo. ur, respon,s es to. these...qu.e s t'i....ons. *.."
.- ~
~
..e.. -.
e.
Sincerely;..
..s..
s.
~
+ -.
w-
- 2 Ni '.: * < St'ephen Com1ey;
^
~
-~
r..
..e j
1 l
s s.
i t
i
(*
l 4'
.s I
I
\\
o itf
- August 22, 1986
~
l
. Commissioner Bernthal
- United States Nucle.ar Resource Council-1717.H Street,.N. W...
2
.' Washington, 'DC 20555' r
Dear. Commi.s.sioner' Bern. thal:
I l
,\\
- < /.
~.:.; ; y:.
- .e.. e.. -
.......,.... u, :...: ;. : : s:
- s.,,c
- ......
.a
. _ u.. ;._,......;..
...~..
- Ehclosed care..the ' questions tihat 'were pos_e;f,E
- o..Mr. -
i'
' Ass'eltitie. On August-15.,.'1986. foV. which - written. answers.
sere pro.vid.edf, on.;Tuesd'ay /. Augtis t < l9 th,
198.6.-
.I exp,ect.
- toi:.be. mee. ting Qith-[the President soon.an'd (wou'ld'.like to.
,e -
.h'a've: your'# re~sponses: t6 ". th e's e ques t' ions.'
'l[
~.a'
~
~
- Sincerely, e
. r..
.+.
'S't;6 phen Comisy.
.t-
~-
s e
g 5
f I?
c.
..~
J August 22, 1986 Corruni'ssioner 'Carr United
- Stat'es Nuclea'r Resource Council l'717:H Streply N.W2 f.
' Washin~gt'on}DC. ?.0535
~
Dear Commissioner C'arr:
..:......... 4 g;.,
,c
..:. i. t. ;,.. : p.. -. q.. :. 91..
Enclos ed '.'a,re th e 'qu'es tion.s ;'.:.. _.,.,.,,,,.that were. posed to'Mr.,'
J, Asseltine,dn.'Aucjust 154. 1.9,86'. for which, written'a'nswers
,I
.were;provided 6n Tuesday;. August 19th, 1986.
I expect
- . l, ' y, -
'to,1be' meeting' withe.the President;soon'and'would like to '.
~
}.,
- have }yodr^re.spdnses I.to these' qdest'ionhI-
, ' ^
~
~.. '
+
s.
.. s..
.Sincereiy,,
i i
j
..c-y sf,g }ien 'U~omi.ey '.. ' '
~
- Y ' '"
p O
r
/35 o
August 27, 1986
\\
Mr. Frederick'JJ. R'yan, '.h r.
Director, Presidential "Appoinilaents and Scheduling Th.e. White Hou...s.e
..:..:Mashington.. D.C.:
',m.:
....... ~.,..
o
- p.,
.-t'..
...+G...
Dear fir. Ryan:
,.P. leas e.; p.ead."the'..relea s e '
. plan, on P ret;urning
'~
...?.. ' I h.' as l'iig (6n'% is 'F(' Sy..endosed.;.'Aucjus('2f..I,'*:19'86)T I;.d$rtiid y'"
4 t
. think 'by"tihis time p6ti.have'lre'ceived. corr'espondencsc from
~
e
/ t'.he ' S s cre'f ).'Si::rv'ide,. 'f'ro'm O f fice rs. Doohe ' and Morri).. - I t.'
' Vods.9withoutlrsaying that;I trill. b.e.ne'edi'ng th. se'e. you '
E.n.e'xt. w.ee.k.. ah" yd6r.' c6nveni. ence-. ' *.....,..',:..
...u,.
's
,.,. v....,..
Sin.cerely,
.s c.
j...
3....
3 g
n
,.,, 7
. :4
.S t eph e n., B.:.. Co~mley.
.Rowleyp. Massachusetts:
r l.
I.n
. l% l-o Appointment with Mr. James K. Asseltine, a commissioner at the NRC.
Appointment August 15 at 3:15 pm.
NRC Office 1717 H Street, NW l1th Floor Washington, DC 1.
'Do you feel that the people of Rowley should have a voice in evacuati,on plann.ing as it pertains to the Seabrook power' plant?
2.-
Evacuation.i.ssue-.~ people who can'.t.be moved... Do you-e pro'vided for people who canno
,,; i
. feel'some.means should b' t
i.
0.
be moyedy ;;othe.r;ifor;, tl, san.,me' rely'j being: she3,,te: red?.,,',.
J,-
. ;. *..,. t.:.
~ ; - -;.,.. ) v
' Location { isstle -: Seabrook'.-
.p
- .y. -:..*
Has the? summer. beach.
3."-
population beeii. fully taken into.'consi~d' erat. ion?,
c
^
4.
As'we have yet to. receive all'of the information on-Chernobyl,.,.what are your opinions on reduci.ng y a ms g?
3
- g f s 3 g,1 gg g, g
~_
the radius
.. ;. c:. s.;,
n :ggg.g
,4.y
..,n.
r"
~
c, s.
.a S '. -
- I /undhis,tand' thati th.e low: revel licens.ing, requirements
~r' '
-~
l'/.
. have.been. reduced 'as i,h.ey pertain to.. issue'sfof ' evacuat' ion.-
-(
I problems"that?. niay. ar'ise i.fi%ascity fok-town'.
'This change,.
...A y,.
c r.-
has enab:lta :quaistii6ns;ri6t? to' b@ resolv'ed' b'efore ajlicense.,
is issued.. Given.th'e Che'rifoby.1. l.ncident 'and the problems'.
.: andJ' ddstion,s* s'urrounding :lthe-Plg' rim Nuplear,' Plant 'in 4
q i
c i-, :,
... Plymodth -(which,has,. bee'n. branded. the. w0,r,s.t-runf plant in,,,,
the US",)f.do.you;.'think,we should reverse,again.and
..~ require that. evaluat: ion Tissues. -be resolved before. a low..
levhl l'icenseh.is grante'd h6any new plants?'-
~
s.
- y c
' 6 '...
Do you' feel ithat the,NRC has.,represeritedi;the ' people.asl ws11"as,.it.has represe'nted thefnuclear industry?
-[.
Has Chernobyl changed your thinking reg irding riuclear power?
8.
Do you feel that. people are really i,nformed about and know of~the dangers of nuclear power?
~9.
Cost versus oth'er fuels - obsolete?
10.-
How many people w'ere hospitalized in'Ru'ssia?
11.
How old was the plant
.3 years?
I f)h I
}.
O ~
/ e?1 o
12.
What are the differences between the Russian plants and our nuclear plants as you see them?
13.
Regardiang future generations, would you recommend that we continue to build nuclear plants?
14.
Do you feel that the public would be justified in' believing that the NRC is not acting in the public's best interest?
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, 2
I.f :' a.:
,(
st
./
~~
Stephen Comley SC:ds
.' ?
,.. a.,.
f s'
~
. r..
4 9
6 D
e e
a O
)
l
~
A
.N 3,,2 a
WE' '
f pjo y;//D
/
Letter.from:
R.
H. Campbell
-C [
Massachusetts' Voice of' Energy 8th floor 120 Boylston Street Boston,. MA- 02119 a
'617/589--5265
~
.... a.
DearaMre-Com16y:
U
- r...
. s.. 3....,.
I., don i,ti. k. 6.,o.w... i.f,,. y. 6.. u..r, m. c..a...m.p.a...ig.n...f.o r,gf a l..a,r..;g,e,,r. 'ev 3 '~
" head, down ;. don' t. ' conf use.mer witti a.ts, c,..h...,arge on.,,/. sort. o.f,,,theor
,.gy,
c
.:;......,.. o. 'r"i f yquyj u.s. t,. h.a..v'e. *..t,he,wro.n.g i. n. f.o...b..u..,t..ar..s. o. p,e..n,' 'to,. r.ea. s.on..and j
d.ata..
.. ~.,
'Iricreasing the' EPZ' may well be. counterproducti.ve.to ' safety,*as fiel'll as i needless cost to towns and to our electric" bills.
.W. 4:?fij% gcupring,?:RQWGCy.;\\9.y*WG;.N'My{'n,41frk.;s5y(-%q;. :;f 3fc..:.ny;g.raj7.cy. ft,8
. ff.F.y..
The tech'n.ica.1 'arguman'ts arc' co stfonf fth'at 'itlic/,NRC. ~ undoubted 1y' Wi;ll'f '.
1r'edu'ce 7 thel EPZJ-.$ut. how.~1'ong,. p'olit;i.cs.will. delay si t: is. unknowable,,.
-- e,.,. -
.. The. ' f a6't'. ~tliat)l hsp : work ai ainst plieir. own;,bes t "i'riteres tis." peo
. ~
,1:.'
right'w of ten t J
' g.c.,,.
s.
.e
__,,.,_(
"The. lessons from Chernobyl *:are. quitie ' dif ferent 'fi om,.,' whatYthe'- public.,
, perceives,.:and.they.' imply also.that a' smaller rather than.a larger
' '.i
.S.
. E.zdn,e' Wohl'd ;b.e 'appr.opri.atef'.
r
..,...m
'tra'dki ' tir'ying t6.$1 ace' more.hospita'l's and nursing homeis:.in.- the $PZ i
. m a.k e s'. n o ' s e n s e.' 'More:than.2 miles'awa~y',.rssponse,can;be.quite-
. -deliberate vand unhurriedy arid.may:Se-no. z,more than, staying.inside.,;4or
...rz n
- af..few hours.. : Evsn.'that much response ha's.,a ve'ry l'ow probability..
fd
)()
'/jj
~
(o_.)
ND
F i
. Q.
f, 2
.. P.
c
.a-i D.f g.:
4
~
gJ
-A
,,g j
a c
i
[ h2 s tu: tu m ow m e nn.
m'nnnw.Mn w 2e.sww a k t
3RC won't-stand in way of Seabrook tests, official res.tates encar power, plant. even,thuughthe plant has no emergency evac / that the NRC has lxen assured by dort such testa. "the takelthood power license until agrtement la tals'ormurping homes undcr in-kery Ackerman the plant's owner that no tests...
an acendent at low power reached on an evacuation plan.. tensive t:areJ-,
. pSa2fl untion plana-will be conducted before evacua-that wouki require protecuve mea-Meanabile..the qper, cf.S 3,.. lie said that Asseltanc alyo as,,
t) A jop US Nuclear HqtuIalory llowever. Victor Stello, cueeu-tson zone hearings are heki start-sures tryond the boundaries of nursing home located 3n Rowley. scrted. as he has on carher ocea--
%somassion omctat.has repealed. Hve director for agrratione at the ang Sept. 29.
the plant is negitgtbly small."
Mass Just outside thc'Seatrook stons, that *In aome cases" the piat the federal agency will not agency's Washington headquar#
Sirtio'sletter.rtleased by Mav-Itreause of this. ~he said, the plant'sproposed 10 milermergen agencythaa act6f more as the nind trethe way of bew-power Iers. also said en a irtler to US routes's olhrt in Washington. ac-agency was standing by the ey tone continued hascampaign to. protector of the nuclear Indastry
- pating at.the Scabrook. HJt., pu. Hep. Nicholsas Mavrpuksit>Masel knowkxfged that. as Gov. pukakis encxiurage the redsus.be widened than as the protector of the pute
'e v-J" arut esher erttics have contended.,, change et made in its hcentang regulatione in'1982, shich :Ilows 1615 ne.20 inlicsf.V'*M) who has' 'ata!T tould'a'ddrcss' safety issue A
A h
fj f lh' l
y new nuclear plants to load urant-Stephen B ' Con $ ley fl
~88 88 P ysically parsible for an ac-
'5 h
l E * *
[y...
I t
i esdent to amor in a meetcar power um fuel andconduct testa at 6 per-i been meeting an WashtAgtors wiur.J shore aggressively'Ji it was: direct %
1 E
W l
MLTTl R&lI;l 'ETl EINR_i? M wli+ mi+1tM 4n M 1 71 *iCl plant opanting at low power " cent of design espacity even offsetals and congressional aides ed to do sa. ?
.f The state wants no tests conduct-though evacuation plans may not for the past 10 days, said in a tele-
' Comley propose; to dettver'3rts, *
(
gg ed untti en emergency plan is ap-be cornplete' phone' Interview that' he felt he tions from about52,000'Rowley I
j proved by the NHC and Ihe Feder-A spokesman for Mavroutes, won encouragement from NRC residents. asking for expansion of n
,9 l
{%~V:<
at Ernergency bianagerntnt Agerg.: Charics.lknrencesid. that 9thsle= ;OornmassionerJaspesp 15.;Assejtinc. thq Seabrook. amegy,ncyptannag;. 3 7 4
e
- ' 'M l 9 T
ey.
e.
the congressman was pleased by i'Comley ated Asseltinesin a.gsone; to President Reagan. A first t 2
gg a
that. sn tane wHh previous state-Ihe news no testa are planned. Iwerhourmeetinglast Frtday,also. request'for an appnintownp was 7,
,I bV 1 P 1 FV Y ments l'y the NRC Stello makt that soon. the rest of Stello's letter, agreed,that, the.NRC 7as 'not,,, turneqldoyn last wcek on grpundsl,,,
in Ek}af ENANCE FREE F4NtSH because Heert would be very laule "had unsetthng Impt.tcations."
fared up to the situation where.
evacuation is impnssible for some ? the presloent was too bissy,tryttig.
liuthtop ni dangerous atamic fis-Ilrown sahl Mavruules would con-f to clear his desk before his vaca /
j 9 TWtN qqEJATCHE.S Fos EXTRA SECURfW pan.pyp,cducts erwoe thy plant unue to.appone tsauance of a full- '
people." such as patsents in hospi-Blun.
':) ; A..
[
e TRTING PANELS FOR EASY CLEANING
~H4F" '"'
- v
.....,0,. _ p.us
.ht, Hispames protest Bowh.
- h. School condoMlan-m-, - - -
ic i
. WINSut.ATING GLASS OF 3 r
% y'*A
. osCtuots AAEASuasNG & INSTALLATION c W-INDOWS ny Aanne suu Clotse Sta(I 1
. the Flynn administration, which - trousing._wnsen paennea sne. am would. gtdte eligitde sor.
e aaks the Dowditch School develop- ** Tent Cityytst among theircom ' c!ther the Ictintx>rrE8 er 'muder.*
I
.a
' Nearly 100 Hispanica rajnped ment 'gIrovfoct sf aubstantial per" plainta th(cushtention that Flynn ateincer'nhirtMd imt(s erid that e; is e, 3j i 1
ee in the yard ut a former Jamaica centage of affordate units.
Is sabotaging his own potscy of. suany of the co'ndns will contain I'lahi wtwaul rimant6ng. No s=ns "This' project. sn fact.repre-trying to add affordable units to more than two hedrooms. t a
y
. w mudaran sus,nus mudaranwe shats n' t be sents 44 percent of affordable the elly's housing supply becausein the Isrst sts nuniths of this AND SONS INC.
span 9,h for o
residents of the area - many of yea,. ciii,s said,w.si,oetion has
,mits, e,,,,,dinc ia n.nn cmis. di-g g { Q HOMEIMPROVEMENT n= rd in an event ahned at
,n,,,,,,
g,, u,,y,,, s 0: sue of wtuun are unemploynt - du ruit tegun on 2.*m unstn ed a,,,ffordable Sp[CIALISTS
.oh e ung t,H g 14.dllhat Orts in.dal g,.lgtdde luvul frr ves ch tarn efMMegle lo sgualify far the i,,,,,,,,,,,,,,p,,,,<hio,,,
,pa,,f
~
Hy lo tuul and kn p athed d+
NeightmNinual gnarps surh as unlis.
3 4(10 tm.?s trl tJy the suaynr t.sht "
W h en i ? T yy 7v. ry g.r- ;
m y
- 1. w - m i.u a & H e u.w w n.
eu h'a:nh nu lu'an has trarla'l cu,. I u t.
a en.i.ni:.ica piun n.d cuns sake that innrr than
....... e.io,si,.,,g H,c en v ani
c.
M o
Sheraton Grand Hotel 525 New Jersey Ave, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20001 September 8, 1986 Mr. Tom Welle Media Representative Potomac Electric Power Company 1900 Pennsyvania Avenue, N.W.
Room 506 Washington, D.C.
20068
Dear Mr. Welle:
I have listed below the questions and answers covered in our conversation of August.21st.
I would appreciate your written confirmation ~of this discussion.
I am also anclosing a copy of just the questions that I would like you to pass on to your immediate superiors.
I expect to be meeting with the President soon.
Some high officials and members of the Press are aware of these questions.
Q.
Do you have any nuclear power plants?
A.
No, we don't have any.
Q.
Why don't you have any?
A.
Potomac Power decided to scrap their plans for a proposed power plant in 1977.
Q.
What was their reasoning for cancelling the plans?
A.
They thought it was in the best interest of the people.
Q.
Why did they think it was in the best interest of the people?
A.
Because the demand for electricity had diminished.
(Comment by Mr. Conley:
I thought that was very interesting given that our government was reacting to the oil embarp issue and was encouraging the O
building of nuclear power plants as a viable source of energy.
But obviously this company was going against all trends for legitimate reasons which were not made public and heeded by fellow power companies.)
e
\\
l ilD L
p/6 o
Mr. Tom Welle September 8, 1986 Page Two i
0.
Could it. be also that you felt it was in the best interest of the people to cancel these plants because of a safety factor?
A.
We felt it was the best financial alternative at the time given our costs for building these plants was astronomical.
O.
D'id your company feel it was odd that other companies went ahead and built these nuclear plants?
A.
No, because they were already committed and could not abandon the idea because they had too much moeny already in the project.
Q.
If there were still applications being ' applied for after 1980, didn't your company think it was odd?
A.
You had better ask someone higher up.
Q.
If PEPCO was discourage.d from going ahead with their proposed nuclear plant -for the reasons that you have given - astronomical construction fees as well as a threat to the safety to the public, don't you also feel that it was the responsibility of PEPCO to inform the American people as well as other people in the atomic industry of 'your concerns so that it would be concluded to be in the best interests of the American people?
A.
No comment - you had better ask someone higher up.
I have had many conversations with Congressional people as well as the NRC and have 1e'c them know of my concerns.
I hope to be meeting with President Reagan soon and would like to have your of ficial answers to these questions.
Sincerely, C
Stephen B. Comley p
(
I 1/ t 9
Sheraton Grand Hotel 525 New Jersey Ave. NW Washington, DC 20001 Q.
Do you have any nuclear power plants?
Q.
Why don't you have any?
Q.
What was their reasoning for cancelling the plans?
Q.
Why did they think it was in the best interest of the people?
Q.
Could it be also that you felt it was in the best interest of the people to cancel these plants because of a safety factor?
Q.
Did your company feel it was odd that other companies went ahead and built these nuclear plants?
~
Q.
If there were still app 11 cations being applied for after 1980, didn't your company think it was odd?
- .i.
If PEPCO was discouraged from going ahead with their proposed nuclear plant for the reasons that you have given - astronomical construction fees as well as a threat to the safety to the public, don't you also feel that it was the responsibility of -
PEPCO to inform the American people as well as other people in the atomic industry of your concerns so that it would be concluded to be in the 1
best interests of the American people?
1 I have had many conversations with Congressional people as well as ".e NRC and have let them know of my concerns.
.. hope to be meeting with President Reagan soon and would like to have your official answers to these questions.
Sincerely, Stephen B. Comley p
t
r-o PSPoc p
Potomac Elecinc Power Company 1900 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. DC 20068-0001 MEDIA RELATIONS (202)872-2680 September 18, 1986 Mr. Stephen B. Comley Sheraton Grand Hotel 525 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20001
Dear Mr. Comley:
I am in receipt of your recent letter on nuclear power plants and hope this response will clear up some of your questions concerning PEPCO's involvement with the issue.
First of all, let me say that I cannot confirm the quotes you attributed to me in your letter.
As I discussed with you last month, PEPCO does not have any nuclear power facilities nor does the Company plan to construct a nuclear power plant in the future. Currently, about 90 percent of the energy PEPCO's
.tstomers receive is coal fired, with oil providing the remaining 10 percent.
In the 1970s PEPCO did have a $1.8 billion plan to construct nuclear an.51 coal-fired generating facilities to meet rapidly growing energy demands of the Washington area.
However, following the 1973-74 Arab oil embargo, energy demand dropped sharply from an annual growth rate of 9 to 10 percent to an almost flat rate of growth. As a result of this dramatic decline' in energy demand, PEPCO cancelled plans in 1977 to construct both the nuclear and coal-fired generating facilities.
As you can see, energy conservation by PEPCO customers led to the Company's decision to drop plans to construct a nuclear plant.
In your letter you asked for PEPCO's official response to plans by other utilities to construct nuclear facilities.
I would like to emphasize that PEPCO does not comment on the operations of other companies.
Since PEPCO is not privy to business decisions made by other utilities, it would be unwise for PEPCO to comment.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your questions.
Sincerely, 7
J.M I
q Thomas R. Welle
(/
Media Representative um William H. Jones, Vice President, Corporate Affairs c:
Nancy S. Moses, Manager, Media Relations
//r
}
t a